I'm throwing this out there...

[Steve9347]

If you are foregoing speed at the top of the lineup, why not have Anderson bat 8th in CF and make Ramirez bat 9th?

 

You'd certainly have better defense.

Yes yes yes yes.

[Texsox]

So the fact that Fields was nearly more productive in his 400 ABs doesn't count because it wasn't a full season? That's BS.

 

nearly more productive

almost as good defensively

 

Are you claiming that Fields last season was as good as Crede's best season? I think Fields still has a little ways to go, and has that to prove. If you believe he has already proved it, then your threshold is lower than mine. I did not mean to dismiss what he did last season, I just think he still has something to prove.

[sf_soxfan]

Dramatic -- but i kinda like it. Problem is the Giants don't much to trade and are probably not willing to take on both salaries. Still, an outfield of Swisher/Owens/Anderson/Quentin would be exciting. I like Dye, but this would clear up another logjam. Dye's trade value was too low last summer although the Sox clearly wanted to do that but instead wound up offering a half-hearted extension to hedge against not having any prospects. Now that Anderson and Quentin are clearly ready to perform, I think Dye is expendable.

 

 

[RockRaines]

Whats with this community? Why all the sudden Crede hatred and the thinking that Fields is the next coming of God?!

 

Sorry to break it to you guys, but Crede > Fields.

 

This is no different than the endless BA, BMAC and countless other never-beens this community latches onto like a bunch of girls fawning over Hannah Montana.

 

Give it a rest.

 

Oh, and for the record, I like Fields, but I think Crede is better at this stage.

Uh oh, here comes Crede's crew out of the woodwork.

 

Crede is an avg 3B. Above avg glove, below avg bat. Not too many teams if any would want him in place of their starting 3B. Josh Fields in his rookie campaign put together almost as many win shares in half a season as Crede did in his peak. Right now Fields is better with the bat with nowhere to go but up. Fields>>>>>Crede in so many ways.

[RockRaines]

nearly more productive

almost as good defensively

 

Are you claiming that Fields last season was as good as Crede's best season? I think Fields still has a little ways to go, and has that to prove. If you believe he has already proved it, then your threshold is lower than mine. I did not mean to dismiss what he did last season, I just think he still has something to prove.

Ah, Cherry picking, I like it. Crede's BEST season which was years ago vs a half season of a rookie. How about Crede's production over his career vs Fields? That would be a bit more accurate dont you think. Crede is more a injury prone version of Pedro Feliz.

Edited April 1, 2008 by RockRaines

[Texsox]

Ah, Cherry picking, I like it. Crede's BEST season which was years ago vs a half season of a rookie. How about Crede's production over his career vs Fields? That would be a bit more accurate dont you think. Crede is more a injury prone version of Pedro Feliz.

 

My original statement was both Fields and Crede have the same thing to prove, that they can play to Crede's best season.

 

Anything less is a step back for the team and neither is a good replacement.

 

But for Fields' fanboys he only has to prove mediocre

[RockRaines]

My original statement was both Fields and Crede have the same thing to prove, that they can play to Crede's best season.

 

Anything less is a step back for the team and neither is a good replacement.

 

But for Fields' fanboys he only has to prove mediocre

Fields fanboys huh? Well I guess that includes dozens of MLB scouts and baseball analysts who say Josh Fields is one of the more exciting young players we have. I bet they see his mediocrity coming as well.

 

 

And of course Fields has something to prove, he hasnt even played a full season of MLB ball yet, but he has shown month by month improvement, the ability to hit to all fields with power and the fact that he is already as good if not better offensively than the current incumbent. And Joe Crede has shown what type of a player he is, he had an outlier season then was plagued by an injury that has been reoccurring throughout his career. I dont know how much more he can prove that hes a below avg offensive 3B to me or anyone else. Can you even find a team in the MLB that would gladly take him over their current starter?

[Texsox]

Once again, how is Fields supposed to do this exactly, with Crede still here?

It's impossible. That's why no bench player has ever earned a starting spot without another player leaving.

 

Fields HoF RIGHT NOW NOTHING TO PROVE

[RockRaines]

It's impossible. That's why no bench player has ever earned a starting spot without another player leaving.

 

Fields HoF RIGHT NOW NOTHING TO PROVE

Exaggeration masking that you have no real argument, nice work.

[Texsox]

Exaggeration masking that you have no real argument, nice work.

 

No argument to make. There is no definition of "proof". I think he had a very nice rookie campaign, but still has some playing to do before he has proven himself as a mlb player.

 

Others believe they have seen all they need to to anoint him a mlb player.

 

To think there is some definitive argument to be made is hilarious.

 

So according to Rock, Fields has nothing left to prove. I will accept that you have seen enough for your judgment. It would be stupid of me to argue that you need more proof.

[RockRaines]

No argument to make. There is no definition of "proof". I think he had a very nice rookie campaign, but still has some playing to do before he has proven himself as a mlb player.

 

Others believe they have seen all they need to to anoint him a mlb player.

 

To think there is some definitive argument to be made is hilarious.

 

So according to Rock, Fields has nothing left to prove. I will accept that you have seen enough for your judgment. It would be stupid of me to argue that you need more proof.

Looks a few posts above to see if I think he has anything more to prove, reading is a fundamental aspect of being able to convey your counterpoint, look into it.

 

And the fact that in half a season, his win shares were about that of Crede's best year says alot. So does the fact that offensively he is already to Joe Crede's level if not better. How about objectively? In ST he hit better and fielded better than Crede did.

 

Still waiting on those teams that would want Crede over their starter. He is just not that good of a player.

Edited April 1, 2008 by RockRaines

[Texsox]

Nice Tex. I try to propose a serious question, and thats your response. Way to encourage debate.

 

Debate? My statement is *I* think he still has something to prove. What's to debate? You've seen enough, I would never, based on one season, or probably even two, say a player has proven their actual abilities. You need less proof. That's great, but what is there to argue or debate?

 

OK, y'all convinced me, nothing left to prove. In fact, Rock and Tony, you will win every debate and argument from here forward.

[Texsox]

Looks a few posts above to see if I think he has anything more to prove,

So if I say he has something to prove it's wrong, but if you do, then it's right. GMAFB

[knightni]

Why do I have the urge to close; like, half of all posted threads on this board lately?

 

 

[witesoxfan]

I don't think Fields has proven his true ability, because I think Fields is a .900 OPS bat at some point in the near future. I don't think Crede is ever going to get near that ever again.

 

FWIW, Fields was on a 42 homer pace (projected over 700 PAs) in the 2nd half of last season.

 

And, finally, I also wouldn't say Crede is an upgrade defensively at 3B right now.

[Texsox]

There is no reason to close it. It was a few of trying to have a debate(thats what a message board is for) but some don't seem to understand it goes both ways.

Why would you want to debate my standard for when I think a player has proven their abilities? I think it takes more than one season. You disagree. OK. You have your standard and I have mine. I've watched too many one season wonders.

[Wanne]

Why would you want to debate my standard for when I think a player has proven their abilities? I think it takes more than one season. You disagree. OK. You have your standard and I have mine. I've watched too many one season wonders.

 

Tex...I can appreciate both sides of the debate and for the record I'm a Fields guys now. I've always loved Joe and am thankful for everything he's done...but don't you think Joe is the one in the position of having to "prove" himself now coming off major back surgery and a problem that's hindered him the past 3 years or so?!?

[Texsox]

Tex...I can appreciate both sides of the debate and for the record I'm a Fields guys now. I've always loved Joe and am thankful for everything he's done...but don't you think Joe is the one in the position of having to "prove" himself now coming off major back surgery and a problem that's hindered him the past 3 years or so?!?

As I said, they *both* have something to prove. BOTH. And it isn't, in my mind, which one is better.

 

Crede has to prove he can play his best. At the minimum, that is the current standard.

 

Unlike Rock, I believe it is equally fair to hold Fields to that same standard. If neither one of these guys can play to Crede's best, then we've taken a step backwards, and *I* think that is unacceptable. Others may believe it is acceptable. But it seems it's only ok if "their" guy is playing. I don't really care which guy is playing.

 

I would also like to see Fields approach Crede's lifetime BA for one season. That would "prove" something to *me*. If you have a lesser or different standard, that's cool. Use what you feel comfortable with. If my standard bothers you, sorry.

[Texsox]

When is he supposed to prove this to you?

 

My only comment about Fields, is the same I would make for any player, *I* need to see more than one season.

 

If you really need to know how a player gets a chance, there are many ways. But I assume you know this, so I wonder why you ask.

 

Some players are called up because of an injury, play well, and stay on the roster. Others replace a retired player. Still others replace a traded player. Then some play well in spot starts, as pitch hitters, late inning defensive spots, etc. Some get to play because they signed big contracts and the GM doesn't want to look like a fool. Some get to play because the team is trying to trade them and other teams need to see them in action. And I'm certain there are many more.

 

ANd if I can try and anticipate your mext question, there are different goals each season, and at different times during the season. After one game, giving Fields starts so he can prove himself, would not be a high priority. But maybe later this summer.

[Wanne]

As I said, they *both* have something to prove. BOTH. And it isn't, in my mind, which one is better.

 

I would also like to see Fields approach Crede's lifetime BA for one season. That would "prove" something to *me*. If you have a lesser or different standard, that's cool. Use what you feel comfortable with. If my standard bothers you, sorry.

 

Doesn't bother me whatsoever. I'm just comparing rookie stats for both and seeing difference in age/potential/longevity with team and of course $$$ spent. Bottom line is who would help this team the most right now. I guess it still remains to be seen after only one game. I'm hoping Josh's time down in AAA simply makes him "hungrier" when he does get back up.

[Texsox]

Both of these guys fit different holes and depending on what the team needs are, would indicate which is a better fit. My guess, based on what Detroit and Cleveland trots out on the field each day, I'd guess that Fields will be our better option come summer.

[ScottyDo]

Back to the original topic, I'm all over Owens batting 9th (it's what I do) assuming we HAVE to have him on the team. The only problem there is that Ozzie will never ever ever ever EVER bat him anything but leadoff. Okay maybe not that many evers, but quite a few. Also, Quentin should be in our lineup in my opinion. Or Anderson cuz he plays superb CF, as we all know, and might develop a bat sooner or later.

 

Anywho, I'm on your side.

[RockRaines]

Unlike Rock, I believe it is equally fair to hold Fields to that same standard. If neither one of these guys can play to Crede's best, then we've taken a step backwards, and *I* think that is unacceptable. Others may believe it is acceptable. But it seems it's only ok if "their" guy is playing. I don't really care which guy is playing.

 

I would also like to see Fields approach Crede's lifetime BA for one season. That would "prove" something to *me*. If you have a lesser or different standard, that's cool. Use what you feel comfortable with. If my standard bothers you, sorry.

Once again proving you havent actually read my posts. Crede's numbers are fairly obvious. He had an outlier season and you think this is what he is capable of every year, its just not statistically the case.

 

And approaching Joe's numbers?

 

Crede career

.258 .304 .445

 

Fields 1/2 season rookie year

.244 .308 .480

 

You have a rookie who improved month over month and already puts up the same numbers as Joe Crede. Once again, his win shares approached that of Crede's best year.

 

And IM still waiting for the names of teams that would trade their starting 3B for Crede. 2005 was a great year and all, but get off this guys jock. Would you all be clamoring for Pedro Feliz to stay on this team, because thats basically the type of player Crede is.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

I think when Buehrle pitches however, we need Uribe and Anderson out there. Buehrle relies on his defense, and we need all we can get when he pitches. I think we put out the best offenses for Danks and Floyd who will need the run support, and put out our best defense for Buehrle who dosen't strike people out.

[RockRaines]

I think when Buehrle pitches however, we need Uribe and Anderson out there. Buehrle relies on his defense, and we need all we can get when he pitches. I think we put out the best offenses for Danks and Floyd who will need the run support, and put out our best defense for Buehrle who dosen't strike people out.

Probably true, although I still believe BA will bring good offense too.