Sox Sign Erstad

[beck72]

FWIW, If you look at Erstad's splits, he has done very well vs. teams like the Twins, Tigers, and Indians. He has hit better than .300 in his career vs SP's like Rogers, Robertson, Bonderman, Westbrook, Sabathia, Silva. Even his .276 avg vs. Johan Santana is a little surprising.

 

And to those who said Erstad hasn't hit for a few yrs, he hit very well the 1st half of 2005. He hit something like .287/.355/.399 before the ASB. I'd be interested to see if he got injured in the 2nd half of 2005. He was brutal the 2nd half, with an avg of like .230 and OBP of .270.

 

Looking back, Erstad hurt his hip on Aug. 4, 2005--though he slumped in July for undisclosed reasons. He was day to day, and played hurt from Aug. on.

 

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpag...MLB&id=2252

 

If he's healthy, Erstad should help the sox. For the money he's getting, it's well worth the risk

Edited January 27, 2007 by beck72

[Cerbaho-WG]

But you have to factor in the fact that for a top of the lineup hitter, I think OPS is extremely over-rated. Add in the fact that you don't compare his positives defensively, on the field or when it comes to sacrificing himself and giving up outs (which he did a whole lot from the 2 spot in Anaheim under Scioscia).

 

For cripes sakes, I understand if people want to say he doesn't have a good OBP for a top of the order guy but thats the only thing you can really slam when it comes to a healthy Erstad. And yes I think stats are such a bulls*** way to go about something. I think you have to factor in a lot of other things and I'm glad our organization doens't just throw stats out there because had we done so we wouldn't have picked up AJ and his crappy OBP/OPS (yes he hits for a decent avg but with no power prior to joining the Sox and we would have ignored the fact that he calls a good game and adds a ton of intangibles; we wouldn't have picked up Cliff Politte because his stats were awful in Toronto or Podsednik who was coming off a down season and statistically wasn't good aside from stolen bases).

 

Ya, stats are the be all end all. AJ brought intangibles to this team (and a good stick for a catcher, even if he won't hit for power). Politte turned into a damn good reliever for two seasons. Pods had a great year for us in 05 (even though he tailed off near the end). Heck, we'd have dumped Garland and Crede long before if we based things on stats and ignored how Garland was young and had stuff or the fact that even when Crede stunk offensively he was a whiz kid defensively.

 

All you guys doubting Erstad will be flat out wrong if he is in fact healthy. If he isn't, you'll be right and we'll have spent 1.5 mill on him. Big whoop...we were paying Ben Davis that in 04 or 05 when he wasn't even on our roster.

 

Sorry for the rant but f*** I hate people that just throw stats at me since I'm so not a stat guy (even though I do look at them, I just don't call them the end all be all).

 

First of all, Jason, you're right, OPS is overrated. OPS+, like the poster before you used, is a much better barometer of talent and it showed how Erstad has been a bad baseball player, period.

 

Secondly, you're assuming Erstad is healthy, and that's not even known. Everyone knows that Anderson plays a superb center field and is better than Erstad because one, he's not old and two, he hasn't been injured like Erstad has. It's not a stretch to say that he's lost a fair amount of his range, and then coupling that with his offensive numbers, he's an even worse investment.

 

When you start listing names like Pierzynski, Pollitte and Podsednik, you show that you have no idea what you're talking about when you say things like how the aforementioned were great intangible pickups. Bulls***. Pollitte was picked up off the scrap heap, Pierzynski was picked up because Ben Davis sucks and we freed up money by trading Carlos Lee and Podsednik was a gamble on Ozzie's smallball philosophy.

 

Erstad, like Rowand, Eckstein, etc., are overrated because they run into walls and s*** and try real hard. Good for them, but that doesn't mean that they don't lack talent that other players have. While you say he brings intangibles to the team like trying really hard, eating raw meat for breakfast and getting dirty, you're ignoring something: he flat out is a liability on offense and will make more outs than an average player. Now does his defense make up for his offense? Probably not, but he could fluke his way to a good year.

 

If Ozzie uses Erstad right, which we all know he won't, this can easily be a beneficial move. If he gets more than 200 at-bats, it's a bad move.

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(beck72 @ Jan 27, 2007 -> 06:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Even his .276 avg vs. Johan Santana is a little surprising.

But his .276 OBP and .310 SLG% against him isn't surprising.

 

That's why you don't look at one stat while evaluating a hitter, especially batting average.

[Pants Rowland]

But his .276 OBP and .310 SLG% against him isn't surprising.

 

That's why you don't look at one stat while evaluating a hitter, especially batting average.

 

League v. Johan 2006

 

BA: .216 OBP: .257 and SLG%: .360 OPS: .616 SO/BB: 5.21

 

League v. Johan 2004-2006

 

BA: .206 OBP: .251 and SLG%: .341 OPS: .592 SO/BB: 5.12

 

Erstad's OPS v. Santana was below the league average in 2006 at .586. He had no walks but also had only one strikeout in 29 AB v. Santana. FWIW, only Crede (.623), Ozuna (.783) and Thome (.880) had better OPS v. Santana on the entire Sox squad. Only Cintron and Mackowiak struck out as few times and that was in 7 and 3 AB, respectively.

 

The fact is Santana is a freak of nature who has dominated the Sox and the league at a level I can not recall seeing in my years of watching baseball. He does not walk many per nine innings and does not hit many batters either. He strikes out a ton as well. It is not a surprise for Erstad to have identical BA and OBP against him. It is also not surprising that his slugging percentage is so low. The fact is Johan does not give up much in the way of extra base hits. The teams tht beat him manufacture runs. A .276 BA or OBP ain't bad.

 

Unfortunately, the next time the WS face Santana, Guillen will put an all RH lineup against Johan and he will get really comfortable on the rubber and dominate. The one thing I truly agree with Hawk on is Guillen has to stop overplaying the righty lefty act with Santana, among others. It makes it too easy for him to get comfortable on the mound.

[beck72]

But his .276 OBP and .310 SLG% against him isn't surprising.

 

That's why you don't look at one stat while evaluating a hitter, especially batting average.

Thank you.

 

I guess the larger point was missed, that he hits some of the key AL Central SP's pretty well

[CWSGuy406]

If Ozzie uses Erstad right, which we all know he won't, this can easily be a beneficial move. If he gets more than 200 at-bats, it's a bad move.

 

In a nutshell, this is pretty much it. If Ozzie uses him correctly -- which, IMO, consists of being a late-inning sub for Konerko at first-base, and an occasional CF/LF/1B start for tough righty matchups or whenever Konerko needs a rest -- then he can be an asset.

 

If he gets the afformentioned 120+ games, then he'll prove to be a liability, and all the punter-i-ness and grit in the world won't change a damn thing about that. The guy is not a good hitter.

 

I would be very pissed if the Sox have (more or less) given up on Anderson after a stretch of ~350 bad ABs. That would be an awful job by Kenny Williams and everybody else in the front office. I mean, one year ago they traded away Chris Young because they said they had all the confidence in the world in BA, and now this?

 

I'm just not getting good vibes from this move. I don't like Erstad saying that he's trying to win the starting CF job. Yeah, I know it's good for the guy to be competitive, but I hate seeing starting jobs on the line in Spring Training. Hitting well in Arizona means jack s***, and one of the most important defensive positions on the field is 'up for grabs'? Give me a f***ing break...

[witesoxfan]

In a nutshell, this is pretty much it. If Ozzie uses him correctly -- which, IMO, consists of being a late-inning sub for Konerko at first-base, and an occasional CF/LF/1B start for tough righty matchups or whenever Konerko needs a rest -- then he can be an asset.

 

If he gets the afformentioned 120+ games, then he'll prove to be a liability, and all the punter-i-ness and grit in the world won't change a damn thing about that. The guy is not a good hitter.

 

I would be very pissed if the Sox have (more or less) given up on Anderson after a stretch of ~350 bad ABs. That would be an awful job by Kenny Williams and everybody else in the front office. I mean, one year ago they traded away Chris Young because they said they had all the confidence in the world in BA, and now this?

 

I'm just not getting good vibes from this move. I don't like Erstad saying that he's trying to win the starting CF job. Yeah, I know it's good for the guy to be competitive, but I hate seeing starting jobs on the line in Spring Training. Hitting well in Arizona means jack s***, and one of the most important defensive positions on the field is 'up for grabs'? Give me a f***ing break...

 

Every word in this post hits exactly what I feel and I have been trying to say about this move.

 

I'm warming to the deal - if you want to call it that - but I'm not really excited to see Erstad in uniform, just because of what could happen to him. If he's completely healthy, and he can stay completely healthy, then he could be the Aaron Rowand to this team. If he's hurt, I really don't like the spot the Sox are in.

[beck72]

If he's completely healthy, and he can stay completely healthy, then he could be the Aaron Rowand to this team. If he's hurt, I really don't like the spot the Sox are in.

 

The risk the sox have taken with Erstad is very minimal. At worst he provides a major league bat as insurance in LF until Pods is ready and gives Sweeney/ Fields/ another 1/3 to a 1/2 season to develop in AAA. At best, he stays healthy and moves between LF and CF [giving Pods time off and Brian some rest vs tough RHP] while hitting close to .290 with an OBP of .350 +.

[CWSGuy406]

The risk the sox have taken with Erstad is very minimal. At worst he provides a major league bat as insurance in LF until Pods is ready and gives Sweeney/ Fields/ another 1/3 to a 1/2 season to develop in AAA. At best, he stays healthy and moves between LF and CF [giving Pods time off and Brian some rest vs tough RHP] while hitting close to .290 with an OBP of .350 +.

 

Not to nitpick, but the last time he had a .350 OBP was 2000, and although he's moving to a hitters park, he doesn't strike me as the type of hitter who will greatly benefit from moving to the Cell. In fact, the bigger dimensions at LA probably benefited the a 'slap' hitter like Erstad.

 

The risk also becomes much more significant if you think of the harm it might do to Brian Anderson's development (to no fault of Erstad himself, but of Ozzie). I want Anderson to get 500+ uninterupted ABs before I decide whether or not he can hit major league pitching. With this signing, if Anderson comes out and hits .190 in April, he's not going to be the starter -- he's going to be a platoon mate, and that's going to do nothing but harm to his progression.

 

At this point in Erstad's career, I don't think you can make the argument that the Sox would benefit significantly from having Erstad take ABs away from Anderson against righties. His last 700 ABs have been worse than 2006 Scott Podsednik -- he's been awful.

 

I can handle Erstad being our opening day LFer and filling in for Pods while he heals, but if at any point Erstad is taking away ABs from Anderson, it becomes a bad move.

[beck72]

Not to nitpick, but the last time he had a .350 OBP was 2000, and although he's moving to a hitters park, he doesn't strike me as the type of hitter who will greatly benefit from moving to the Cell. In fact, the bigger dimensions at LA probably benefited the a 'slap' hitter like Erstad.

 

The risk also becomes much more significant if you think of the harm it might do to Brian Anderson's development (to no fault of Erstad himself, but of Ozzie). I want Anderson to get 500+ uninterupted ABs before I decide whether or not he can hit major league pitching. With this signing, if Anderson comes out and hits .190 in April, he's not going to be the starter -- he's going to be a platoon mate, and that's going to do nothing but harm to his progression.

 

At this point in Erstad's career, I don't think you can make the argument that the Sox would benefit significantly from having Erstad take ABs away from Anderson against righties. His last 700 ABs have been worse than 2006 Scott Podsednik -- he's been awful.

 

I can handle Erstad being our opening day LFer and filling in for Pods while he heals, but if at any point Erstad is taking away ABs from Anderson, it becomes a bad move.

 

Erstad's last 700 ab's haven't been awful. He was hitting .289/.355/.399 at the all star break in '05--hitting #1 and #2 in the lineup and playing everyday. Erstad then hurt his hip in late '05, played everyday, and tailed off to his .273 avg and /.329 obp line

 

The sox [i believe rightly so] aren't worried about Anderson's progression and development. They want production at this point so they can make the playoffs. If Erstad hits near his career numbers [not an unlikely scenario], I'd expect Brian to play a lot of defense late in games in Lf and/ or CF. While it would hurt his development, the team goals of winning games come first. While Anderson projects to be better than Erstad the next 10 years, Erstad might outperform him in the short term. Brian has to show he can put together quality AB's and outhit erstad. We all know he can field.

 

And it might not even be Brian who's the odd man out if Erstad is healthy and hitting. Pods hitting and playing defense like he did last yr won't see a lot of time.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

Erstad's last 700 ab's haven't been awful. He was hitting .289/.355/.399 at the all star break in '05--hitting #1 and #2 in the lineup and playing everyday. Erstad then hurt his hip in late '05, played everyday, and tailed off to his .273 avg and /.329 obp line

 

The sox [i believe rightly so] aren't worried about Anderson's progression and development. They want production at this point so they can make the playoffs. If Erstad hits near his career numbers [not an unlikely scenario], I'd expect Brian to play a lot of defense late in games in Lf and/ or CF. While it would hurt his development, the team goals of winning games come first. While Anderson projects to be better than Erstad the next 10 years, Erstad might outperform him in the short term. Brian has to show he can put together quality AB's and outhit erstad. We all know he can field.

 

And it might not even be Brian who's the odd man out if Erstad is healthy and hitting. Pods hitting and playing defense like he did last yr won't see a lot of time.{/b}

 

Thank you. Injuring himself while training is not a good sign. I also hope Erstad has quit the chewing tobacco for health reasons. With his history of injuries he's got to consider any unhealthy habit can be a contributing factor to overall health.

[beck72]

Thank you. Injuring himself while training is not a good sign. I also hope Erstad has quit the chewing tobacco for health reasons. With his history of injuries he's got to consider any unhealthy habit can be a contributing factor to overall health.

If the sox start 2007 with a trio of Anderson, Erstad and Sweeney in LF and CF, and they are doing well, Pods very well could be the odd man out. Both Pods and Anderson need to step up or the sox will find replacements.

[CWSGuy406]

Erstad's last 700 ab's haven't been awful. He was hitting .289/.355/.399 at the all star break in '05--hitting #1 and #2 in the lineup and playing everyday. Erstad then hurt his hip in late '05, played everyday, and tailed off to his .273 avg and /.329 obp line

 

You can't just throw out those ABs. He's an injury prone player who chose to try and play through an injury. His OBP is close to .320 in his last 700 ABs. That's not good, any way you want to spin it.

 

If Erstad hits near his career numbers [not an unlikely scenario], I'd expect Brian to play a lot of defense late in games in Lf and/ or CF.

 

Erstad's career numbers are boosted by a year in 2000 in which he hit .355. You think it's not at all unlikely that he can slug .415, despite the fact that he hasn't done that since 2000?

 

And you also don't think it will hurt BA's development to come off the bench as a late inning sub? So, sporadic ABs are going to help him as a young player? Hah... I guess I must be the only one who thinks it's the total opposite.

 

While it would hurt his development, the team goals of winning games come first. While Anderson projects to be better than Erstad the next 10 years, Erstad might outperform him in the short term.

 

I'm glad you used the word "might", because I find it very difficult to make the case that Erstad is quite clearly the better option in CF. Anderson is almost definitely the better defender at this point, and if given consistent ABs, I would bet that BA would easily outperform Erstad. Erstad's 'ceiling' is extremely limited; if we could get a 2004 like year out of him, we should consider ourselves quite lucky.

[beck72]

You can't just throw out those ABs. He's an injury prone player who chose to try and play through an injury. His OBP is close to .320 in his last 700 ABs. That's not good, any way you want to spin it.

 

 

 

Erstad's career numbers are boosted by a year in 2000 in which he hit .355. You think it's not at all unlikely that he can slug .415, despite the fact that he hasn't done that since 2000?

 

And you also don't think it will hurt BA's development to come off the bench as a late inning sub? So, sporadic ABs are going to help him as a young player? Hah... I guess I must be the only one who thinks it's the total opposite.

 

 

 

I'm glad you used the word "might", because I find it very difficult to make the case that Erstad is quite clearly the better option in CF. Anderson is almost definitely the better defender at this point, and if given consistent ABs, I would bet that BA would easily outperform Erstad. Erstad's 'ceiling' is extremely limited; if we could get a 2004 like year out of him, we should consider ourselves quite lucky.

 

Anderson has to hit to play CF. If he can hit .275, he should be out there. But if he can't Erstad will likely see a lot of time. As far as who is the better "option" in CF, it depends on what the sox are looking for. And with all the 'BA has to prove himself talk' coming from Ozzie, the glove alone won't cut it. BA has the better glove. But the better bat? You would have a hard time making the case that BA will outhit a healthy Erstad in 2007. Not to mention who could work counts, put the ball in play, etc. If he's healthy, [and that's a big if] Erstad should outhit BA. That says nothing about BA's ceiling, though. Just that it would be hard to see BA hitting .275, .280 this yr. Ozzie will keep BA on a short chain and if he has other options for CF, BA won't be getting those consistent AB's.

 

Coming off the bench would hurt BA's development. I never said it wouldn't. Yet the sox care more about winning games then making sure BA gets consistent AB's. That was the point I made.

 

I don't know what to expect from Erstad. At worst, he can play LF until Pods is back and take over Gload's role. At best, he can put up some decent numbers like .290 avg and an OBP near .350. I know he's not the long term answer for the sox in CF. The sox shouldn't and can't depend on him for that. But what they get from him is extra, [along with a solid work ethic and dedication to the game.] The $750 k deal with the $250 k buyout shows that.

[CWSGuy406]

But the better bat? You would have a hard time making the case that BA will outhit a healthy Erstad in 2007.

 

Really? I know you're not the most keen on the projection systsems, but the average of the more respectable ones (per SouthSideSox) have Anderson at a .253/.317/.410 line and Erstad at a .260/.317/.364 line. That's not to say that these things are right on, but I agree with the general point that should be obvious, that Erstad's power at this point in his career is more or less totally sapped, while Anderson still has a ceiling of ~.450.

 

Yet the sox care more about winning games then making sure BA gets consistent AB's. That was the point I made.

 

And this is what I don't understand. How does Darin Erstad playing more games in CF (aferall, there are more righty pitchers than lefty, so if they did a strict platoon, Erstad would see a lot more PT) equate to more wins than Anderson in CF? Does Erstad's grind, grit, and his 'little things'-ness really overcome his lesser defense in CF and lesser power at the plate?

 

Again -- you may not believe that Erstad>Anderson, and I understand that you're telling me that it's what the Sox as an organization think. I'm just struggling to understand why Erstad is viewed as a potential starter, not as a nice bench player ala Gload last season.

[beck72]

Really? I know you're not the most keen on the projection systsems, but the average of the more respectable ones (per SouthSideSox) have Anderson at a .253/.317/.410 line and Erstad at a .260/.317/.364 line. That's not to say that these things are right on, but I agree with the general point that should be obvious, that Erstad's power at this point in his career is more or less totally sapped, while Anderson still has a ceiling of ~.450.

 

And this is what I don't understand. How does Darin Erstad playing more games in CF (aferall, there are more righty pitchers than lefty, so if they did a strict platoon, Erstad would see a lot more PT) equate to more wins than Anderson in CF? Does Erstad's grind, grit, and his 'little things'-ness really overcome his lesser defense in CF and lesser power at the plate?

 

Again -- you may not believe that Erstad>Anderson, and I understand that you're telling me that it's what the Sox as an organization think. I'm just struggling to understand why Erstad is viewed as a potential starter, not as a nice bench player ala Gload last season.

 

Erstad was told he'd be seeing a lot of PT from all accounts. Those AB's have to come from either LF or CF. We know the amount of AB's Gload got. The sox must think he can give them equal or better than what BA can. If Erstad's healthy, that isn't a big stretch. That is only this season. Long term, BA >>> Erstad. But in 2007.....Ozzie himself said that BA wasn't his Cfer. That it's open. I think the issues with BA are far beyond trying to light a fire under him. He needs to perform with the bat or he'll be out.

 

Power isn't what the sox need from either Erstad or BA. Better AB's than what BA gave in 2006. No more of those 3 pitch AB's, where he looks overmatched. I believe BA will improve on his decent 2nd half. But he will likely need a very strong spring and April in order to be the starter. A few missteps and the sox will likely have a quick hook on Brian.

[Balta1701]

Erstad was told he'd be seeing a lot of PT from all accounts. Those AB's have to come from either LF or CF. We know the amount of AB's Gload got.

Small but important note...the White Sox also do have a righty in Right field, and Erstad could back him up as well. I know he didn't need it last year, but I for one wouldn't complain at all about JD getting a handful of games off this year beyond what he was given off last year (mostly because Mack was in CF every game....)

[Kalapse]

Small but important note...the White Sox also do have a righty in Right field, and Erstad could back him up as well. I know he didn't need it last year, but I for one wouldn't complain at all about JD getting a handful of games off this year beyond what he was given off last year (mostly because Mack was in CF every game....)

I'd much rather have Mack backing up JD in RF.