Erstad/Anderson MEGAThread

[hitlesswonder]

You can't use 10 scattered AB's to form any sort of average and make judgments or conclusions based on the numbers.

 

Well, 10 AB's are all we have. I know the sample size is ridiculous, but to me Anderson has looked worse than Erstad at the plate. Do you really think that if Anderson were starting everyday that he'd be better than Erstad? Maybe, but I haven't seen it. I'd rather the Sox had a CF that can hit, but I don't see one on the roster.

 

 

You want to put mack back out in center?

 

*shudders*

Sweet Georgia Brown No! Never again! But with Pods out I'd like to see a 1-2 of Ozuna/Mack (in LF) and Iguchi. I wasn't clear that I was keeping Pods on the DL in my hypothetical situation...

[witesoxfan]

This team could really use Trot's .235/.316/.353/.669 right about now. Pods was playing well before he got hurt. Let's wait until his average is atleast below .300 before the cries for Trot Nixon begin.

 

it could very easily be June or July before we find out.

[StrangeSox]

Well, 10 AB's are all we have. I know the sample size is ridiculous, but to me Anderson has looked worse than Erstad at the plate. Do you really think that if Anderson were starting everyday that he'd be better than Erstad? Maybe, but I haven't seen it. I'd rather the Sox had a CF that can hit, but I don't see one on the roster.

 

So why not try to develop the one who could be a future for your team instead of the one who's probably going to get injured at some point during the season if he keeps playing this much?

 

If Erstad were hitting even decently (.250), there wouldn't be too much argument. But he's looked brutal at the plate. He has zero power. Almost everything is a soft grounder. His spray charts look like a big blob near the 2B. He's done well in the field, but his age and slower speed have shown a few times.

 

Anderson hasn't looked good at the plate, but he sees pitching once every six or seven days. Hard to improve when you're playing that irregularly. His lackadaisical play in the outfield was definitely a big blow against him yesterday, though. That was the absolute last thing he needed to do at this point.

 

It comes down to the sad fact that the Sox don't have a decent starting CF, and they are forced to play a 4th OF and a struggling young player.

[southsideirish]

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Apr 23, 2007 -> 11:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why are you using Anderson's average in comparison? He's had 11 PAs this year.

 

Why are you using Erstad's April for a comparison as to what he normally does when healthy? He barely played last year. Don't you think he is shaking off a little rust? Don't you think he needs a little time? Do you want to compare Anderson's 2006 April to Erstad's April?

 

Anderson - 62 ABs, 9 runs, 10 hits, 2 doubles, 2 HRs, 6 RBI, 9 BB, 22 Ks, 2 SBs, .161 Avg,, .264 OBP, .290 SLG, .554 OPS

 

Erstad - 64 ABs, 5 runs, 13 hits, 0 doubles, 1 HR, 5 RBI, 5 BB, 9 Ks, 4 SB, .203 Avg, .254 OBP, .250 SLG, .507 OPS

 

Pretty equal and Erstad has 6 more games to improve on those numbers. If everything is equal why would you take a younger player over a vet? I think you are overestimating Anderson's ceiling and you think he is all-star caliber if you want him to play over a vet. I don't see it.

[StrangeSox]

Which is exactly the problem alot of us have. Anderson got just under 400 AB's last season. A good amount, but a young player needs more. At least give Anderson a chance to fail. Right now, he isn't even getting a shot, and right now, it looks like he probably wont again with this organization, which is a shame.

 

Yeah, they really gave up on him too soon. Kenny Williams gets rid of two guys to get him a spot and then he's platooned all year and benched the next. He really showed improvement in July and August last year and showed some potential to be a decent player at the plate and a fantastic outfielder.

 

Why are you using Erstad's April for a comparison as to what he normally does when healthy? He barely played last year. Don't you think he is shaking off a little rust? Don't you think he needs a little time? Do you want to compare Anderson's 2006 April to Erstad's April?

 

Anderson - 62 ABs, 9 runs, 10 hits, 2 doubles, 2 HRs, 6 RBI, 9 BB, 22 Ks, 2 SBs, .161 Avg,, .264 OBP, .290 SLG, .554 OPS

 

Erstad - 64 ABs, 5 runs, 13 hits, 0 doubles, 1 HR, 5 RBI, 5 BB, 9 Ks, 4 SB, .203 Avg, .254 OBP, .250 SLG, .507 OPS

 

Pretty equal and Erstad has 6 more games to improve on those numbers. If everything is equal why would you take a younger player over a vet? I think you are overestimating Anderson's ceiling and you think he is all-star caliber if you want him to play over a vet. I don't see it.

 

 

One can be the future of the team, the other cannot. One is on the decline, the other on the rise. One will likely get injured, the other will not.

 

And a .50 OPS difference isn't that minor. Anderson had more runs, more HR's, and more BB. He also K'd a ton, unfortunately, but it was his first crack in the majors as a starter and he came up with the typical White Sox holes in his swing. Oh, and Erstad has one extra-base hit which came in game 1, and nothing but soft singles since then.

Edited April 24, 2007 by StrangeSox

[southsideirish]

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Apr 24, 2007 -> 12:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So why not try to develop the one who could be a future for your team instead of the one who's probably going to get injured at some point during the season if he keeps playing this much?

 

If Erstad were hitting even decently (.250), there wouldn't be too much argument. But he's looked brutal at the plate. He has zero power. Almost everything is a soft grounder. His spray charts look like a big blob near the 2B. He's done well in the field, but his age and slower speed have shown a few times.

 

Anderson hasn't looked good at the plate, but he sees pitching once every six or seven days. Hard to improve when you're playing that irregularly. His lackadaisical play in the outfield was definitely a big blow against him yesterday, though. That was the absolute last thing he needed to do at this point.

 

It comes down to the sad fact that the Sox don't have a decent starting CF, and they are forced to play a 4th OF and a struggling young player.

 

So you want him in the minors developing? OK I will go for that. I don't think you develop a young player at the major league level on a playoff caliber team. Anderson has never looked good at the plate at the major league level. He is very good defensively. That is it, that is it, THAT IS IT! That is all he has ever done.

[StrangeSox]

I really have my doubts if Anderson will turn out to be a solid major league player, and I am a big Anderson guy. I just am realistic, and so far, things offensively have been a big struggle for Brian. However, if I'm going to be realistic, I also understand that young players don't always come up to the big leagues and dominate, and need to be given time to grow. Anderson isn't doing any growing on the bench.

 

Yeah, his current situation really isn't helping his development at all. He needs to be moved to AAA, traded, or, god forbid, played regularly.

Edited April 24, 2007 by StrangeSox

[witesoxfan]

Why are you using Erstad's April for a comparison as to what he normally does when healthy? He barely played last year. Don't you think he is shaking off a little rust? Don't you think he needs a little time? Do you want to compare Anderson's 2006 April to Erstad's April?

 

Anderson - 62 ABs, 9 runs, 10 hits, 2 doubles, 2 HRs, 6 RBI, 9 BB, 22 Ks, 2 SBs, .161 Avg,, .264 OBP, .290 SLG, .554 OPS

 

Erstad - 64 ABs, 5 runs, 13 hits, 0 doubles, 1 HR, 5 RBI, 5 BB, 9 Ks, 4 SB, .203 Avg, .254 OBP, .250 SLG, .507 OPS

 

Pretty equal and Erstad has 6 more games to improve on those numbers. If everything is equal why would you take a younger player over a vet? I think you are overestimating Anderson's ceiling and you think he is all-star caliber if you want him to play over a vet. I don't see it.

 

First of all, I've been unhappy with the Erstad signing since day 1. When the Sox were even rumored to be after him, I've been pissed. So it has nothing to do with his April; all his April has done is support my claim.

 

Secondly, you can't seriously be comparing a rookie starting in CF to a 12 year veteran, can you? Anderson sucked, but Erstad's been around the blcok a few times.

 

And as far as I'm concerned, that argument is over. Anderson was superiorly s***ty last year; big f'ing deal. I want them both gone at this point, because Anderson's never going to get a chance to start, and Erstad hasn't had a respectable season since 2004.

[StrangeSox]

So you want him in the minors developing? OK I will go for that. I don't think you develop a young player at the major league level on a playoff caliber team. Anderson has never looked good at the plate at the major league level. He is very good defensively. That is it, that is it, THAT IS IT! That is all he has ever done.

 

He hit over .300 for a month last year, and close to it for another month.

 

If he's not getting regular playing time in the majors, he needs to be in the minors. But eventually, you've gotta step up and prove that you can hit major league pitching. It takes some time -- not everyone can come up and do it right out of the gate while being platooned and facing lefties like Johan and C.C.

[southsideirish]

Anderson has turned into the White Sox's version of the Bears backup QB.

 

 

 

I can understand the argument for not batting Erstad leadoff. I can understand the argument that you want to keep the guy healthy and give him some days off. However, I still can't see the argument for replacing Erstad with Anderson. No one has ever made a good argument for that on this board, but yet people still want to see Anderson replace Erstad.

[hitlesswonder]

So why not try to develop the one who could be a future for your team instead of the one who's probably going to get injured at some point during the season if he keeps playing this much?

 

I agree that if 2 players are going to suck, the Sox might as well go with the younger one. But I'll be surprised if Erstad doesn't end up hitting around .260 with zero power and a .310 OBP. And that's not good, but I think it would be better than what Anderson might do. Anderson should be in AAA: he would get ABs and if Erstad does hit the DL Anderson would be sharper if he replaced him. Of course, if Erstad does go on the DL I have no confidence that Guillen would play him over Terrero or Sweeney

[southsideirish]

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Apr 24, 2007 -> 12:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He hit over .300 for a month last year, and close to it for another month.

 

If he's not getting regular playing time in the majors, he needs to be in the minors. But eventually, you've gotta step up and prove that you can hit major league pitching. It takes some time -- not everyone can come up and do it right out of the gate while being platooned and facing lefties like Johan and C.C.

 

He hit .200 or under in every other month. He can't hit major league pitching consistently.He still struck out 26 times in that period. That is more than Uribe in less at-bats. You can't have both Uribe and Anderson striking out that much at the bottom of the order. Someone has to put the ball in play.

[max power]

Anderson has turned into the White Sox's version of the Bears backup QB.

 

 

 

I can understand the argument for not batting Erstad leadoff. I can understand the argument that you want to keep the guy healthy and give him some days off. However, I still can't see the argument for replacing Erstad with Anderson. No one has ever made a good argument for that on this board, but yet people still want to see Anderson replace Erstad.

Do you really think that Erstad would outperform Anderson against lefties?

 

I just don't understand why both players play can't get some playing time -then we could tell who is the better performer instead of arguing about it. Instead he just sits on the bench as somewhat of an unknown.

[southsideirish]

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Apr 24, 2007 -> 12:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

First of all, I've been unhappy with the Erstad signing since day 1. When the Sox were even rumored to be after him, I've been pissed. So it has nothing to do with his April; all his April has done is support my claim.

 

Secondly, you can't seriously be comparing a rookie starting in CF to a 12 year veteran, can you? Anderson sucked, but Erstad's been around the blcok a few times.

 

And as far as I'm concerned, that argument is over. Anderson was superiorly s***ty last year; big f'ing deal. I want them both gone at this point, because Anderson's never going to get a chance to start, and Erstad hasn't had a respectable season since 2004.

 

Erstad is coming back from having a year off. Give him time. Yes, I am comparing a 2nd year player to a 12 year player. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt by going with this year's Erstad stats to last year's Anderson's stats. Would you rather go by Anderson's rookie year compared to Erstad's? How about any of Erstad's first 7 years? Do think Anderson could equal any of them? I don't.

 

 

 

QUOTE(max power @ Apr 24, 2007 -> 12:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do you really think that Erstad would outperform Anderson against lefties?

 

I just don't understand why both players play can't get some playing time -then we could tell who is the better performer instead of arguing about it. Instead he just sits on the bench as somewhat of an unknown.

 

Yes. Anderson is terrible with the bat. He looks absolutely s***ty. I would rather he went down in the minors. We saw Anderson play last year. I want to see Erstad play this year.

Edited April 24, 2007 by southsideirish

[StrangeSox]

Erstad is coming back from having a year off. Give him time. Yes, I am comparing a 2nd year player to a 12 year player. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt by going with this year's Erstad stats to last year's Anderson's stats. Would you rather go by Anderson's rookie year compared to Erstad's? How about any of Erstad's first 7 years? Do think Anderson could equal any of them? I don't.

 

Erstad has had one good year since 2000. How much more time do we give him before evaluating?

 

Oh, and Anderson could probably match his 1999 season pretty well. His OBP and SLG were close last year, and that was with him being useless at the plate for 3 months before getting a little hot after the ASB.

Edited April 24, 2007 by StrangeSox

[southsideirish]

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Apr 24, 2007 -> 12:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Erstad has had one good year since 2000. How much more time do we give him before evaluating?

 

Oh, and Anderson could probably match his 1999 season pretty well. His OBP and SLG were close last year.

 

If BA could match any of his healthy seasons I would love to see him play. I doubt the guy can. I don't think he can match any of Erstad's healthy seasons. Since 2000? I would love to see BA match Erstad's 02, 04, or 05 seasons. If he could do that I would let him play. I don't think he can. Can he hit more HRs? Possibly, but I am not looking for Erstad to hit HRs. We have enough HR hitters in our lineup.

[hitlesswonder]

Do you really think that Erstad would outperform Anderson against lefties?

 

 

Anderson had a .638 OPS vs LHP last season. Erstad has a 3-year OPS vs. LHP of .630. There's not much difference.

[max power]

Yes. Anderson is terrible with the bat. He looks absolutely s***ty. I would rather he went down in the minors. We saw Anderson play last year. I want to see Erstad play this year.

That seems pretty unreasonable to me considering erstad's OBP is less than 200 against LHP. I simply can't see brian doing worse than that.

[StrangeSox]

If BA could match any of his healthy seasons I would love to see him play. I doubt the guy can. I don't think he can match any of Erstad's healthy seasons. Since 2000? I would love to see BA match Erstad's 02, 04, or 05 seasons. If he could do that I would let him play. I don't think he can. Can he hit more HRs? Possibly, but I am not looking for Erstad to hit HRs. We have enough HR hitters in our lineup.

 

He almost did it in his rookie year. He struggled a lot at the plate early on and improved later in the season (before having a crappy September).

 

I'd love to see Erstad match his 02, 04, or 05 seasons. I doubt he will.

[witesoxfan]

Erstad is coming back from having a year off. Give him time. Yes, I am comparing a 2nd year player to a 12 year player. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt by going with this year's Erstad stats to last year's Anderson's stats. Would you rather go by Anderson's rookie year compared to Erstad's? How about any of Erstad's first 7 years? Do think Anderson could equal any of them? I don't.

 

He can't duplicate a 74 OPS? Check out that 1999 season. I'm pretty sure Anderson could duplicate that. How about a 78 OPS+? 88 OPS+? I imagine Anderson will achieve numbers close to those at some point within the next 6 years.

 

Part of me wants to see Erstad keep this up so the team can be successful. The other part wants him to tank hard so the Sox actually go get a CFer.

 

I'm done arguing whose poop smells better, because quite frankly, all poop smells like s***.

[max power]

Anderson had a .638 OPS vs LHP last season. Erstad has a 3-year OPS vs. LHP of .630. There's not much difference.

Right. I am not saying Anderson would be a huge improvement but at least he would get the AB he needs to grow as a player.

[Gene Honda Civic]

Trying to be completely honest... Here's what this armchair GM's roster would look like if he took over after after '04.

 

SP

Buehrle

Garland

Contreras

McCarthy

Whatever prospect that I got from the Carlos Lee salary dump

 

DH -- Thome or Delgado

C -- Pierzynski -- Fell into the Sox lap when we didn't have any other option.

1B -- Kong

2B -- Polanco or Orlando Hudson

SS -- Uribe

3B -- Crede (who would have been signed long term prior to the '06 season)

RF -- Dye

CF -- Young/Anderson (prior to the Vazquez trade, I thought we should keep Anderson for a year, trade him to make room for Young. The poor season would have hurt his value. I still think there were 5 teams that would have loved to have him last off-season, but I don't know if I would have given him up for what they were offering)

LF -- Milledge (Garcia trade last deadline)

 

Bench

Gload

Mack

Cintron

Ozuna

Hall

 

 

The bullpen is where I'd be completely different. I can't even tell you who I'd have down there aside from Jenks. I know I wouldn't have made the Thornton or MacDougal trades. The bullpen probably would be a liability if I was GM.

 

I'm 90% sure we wouldn't have won a world series. We probably wouldn't have won almost 190 games the last two year, but we might have won more. Who knows.

[StrangeSox]

He hit .200 or under in every other month. He can't hit major league pitching consistently.He still struck out 26 times in that period. That is more than Uribe in less at-bats. You can't have both Uribe and Anderson striking out that much at the bottom of the order. Someone has to put the ball in play.

 

BA Post-ASB:

 

.257/.301/.393/.694

 

Any reason he can't duplicate his own numbers from last year with more experience?

 

For s***s and giggles, here's what he did last year with a man on 3rd, less than 2 outs:

.353/.391/.588/.979

 

"Close and late"

.256/.304/.372/.676

 

2nd and 3rd

.500/.538/.900/1.438

Edited April 24, 2007 by StrangeSox

[CWSGuy406]

Can he hit more HRs? Possibly, but I am not looking for Erstad to hit HRs. We have enough HR hitters in our lineup.

 

Yes, damn those homers. We need more hitting to the right side, more 4-3 putouts. I'll give you that -- Erstad is AWESOME at those.

 

I'll answer the question that you've wanted answered, ie why should Anderson start over Erstad. Here are my reasons -- whether or not you choose to 'accept' them is your call.

 

a.) Young players tend to improve, old players (over 32) tend to decline. This is a general rule of thumb. I look at Erstad and Andersonand see two players who, if both (hypothetically) given the exact same number of at-bats, would probably put up similar numbers. Anderson would hit for more power, Erstad would hit for higher average. The difference, of course, is that if Anderson were our everyday CFer, he'd be hitting ninth, rather than first. And nine times out of ten, I'm going with the younger player.

 

b.) This offseason is a big winter, one where there are TWO clear CF upgrades on the market in Ichiro! and Andruw Jones. KW has expressed interest in Jones in the past (almost traded Maggs for him and maybe Russ Ortiz, IIRC). Ichiro! is obvious -- I think that the drooling over Erstad is bad, but the drooling over Ichiro! would be ten times worse. At least he's a good player, though.

 

Anyways -- if the Sox were to give Anderson 450-500 ABs this season, he would have close to 1000 ABs at the major league level. At that point, I think it would be fair to make a decision on Anderson's future as a White Sock.

 

c.) This doesn't address the question, but you say that Anderson looks overmatched. He was told prior to Spring Training -- or at least, this was said in the papers -- that he would 'compete' for the CF spot. He outplayed Erstad in Spring Training, with a similar batting average but much better OBP and SLG% numbers. Anderson looked decent in Spring Training, and has since been relegated to the bench.

 

d.) In Erstad's last 150 (ish) ABs, he's putting up a line right around .215/.270/.310. Slice it any way you want -- that's not good. That's worse than Anderon last year -- much worse, in fact, and that's hard to do.

[southsideirish]

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Apr 24, 2007 -> 12:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He can't duplicate a 74 OPS? Check out that 1999 season. I'm pretty sure Anderson could duplicate that. How about a 78 OPS+? 88 OPS+? I imagine Anderson will achieve numbers close to those at some point within the next 6 years.

 

Part of me wants to see Erstad keep this up so the team can be successful. The other part wants him to tank hard so the Sox actually go get a CFer.

 

I'm done arguing whose poop smells better, because quite frankly, all poop smells like s***.

 

If you think he can then you hold Anderson in a much higher regard than I do. Regardless of what Erstad does this season I think they will get a CFer next year. They LOVE Andruw Jones and I think they will pay him if he doesn't re-sign with Atlanta. They will go after him pretty good. Erstad could then play LF next year if his option is picked up. I don't want them to have to go after a CFer this year. I don't even know who would be available that I would want. I would rather have Philly continue to struggle so we could try to pry Jimmy Rollins away from them. I don't know what they would want but I would like to have him on the White Sox.