Quentin for Crawford?

[soxfan3530]

i woud do it in a heart beat. (assuming he signs an extension)

[Thad Bosley]

I like Carlos, but the thought of Crawford in left flanked by Rios in center is very appealing. They're the same age (28), and so if you could somehow extend Crawford we'd have a relatively young, athletic outfield for years to come. Just get a stop-gap measure for right field until Danks and Mitchell come along, and the outfield would seem to be set for awhile. Interesting.

[elrockinMT]

My feeling is that there were "discussions" as is rumored, but we all know what that might mean. They discussed it and said no or let's move on to something else. There is always the posibility of someone gettiong moved in a trade, but I am leaning towards the Sox bring back Pods. The DH is anyone's guess as well as bullpen help, but that might come later with free agent bargains, if any still exist.

[lostfan]

God I hope not. Carl Crawford is what he is - an .800-.825 OPS player who is going to get really expensive really fast. Carlos Quentin, in what was considered a bad year, still put up a .779 OPS, though it was mostly slugging favored, and he's still under team control for a while. His BABIP last year was .223, which is very, very low.

 

Unless the Sox are absolutely convinced that he is constantly going to be an injury waiting to happen, I don't even consider this.

His BABIP was low because he wasn't hitting, which there were other reasons for. Had nothing to do with luck

[chw42]

I simply would not do this. It's simply a money issue. We have Quentin under control for at least 3 more years. Crawford's going to get paid after this one. Plus, we all know what Carlos can do when healthy.

[chw42]

His BABIP was low because he wasn't hitting, which there were other reasons for. Had nothing to do with luck

 

Not entirely true.

 

Quentin hit 16.3% line drives last year, a percent up from 2008, which means that his average should have been better than .230. His ground ball rate went down by 8% while his fly ball rate went up by 7%. It is true that fly balls are more likely to be outs than ground balls, but from what I remember, Carlos hit a lot of ground balls to third because he was rolling over the ball so much. I didn't remember him hitting as many lazy fly balls for easy outs. I do however, remember him getting robbed and hitting fly balls near the warning track.

 

His HR/FB also went down by 6%, so there's part of the reason why he didn't hit that many home runs. If we get a spray chart with the ball locations for Quentin, we might actually see some fly balls that could have been home runs or some line drives that might have been snagged. That's my perception of it at least. Quentin was unlucky last year, but he was also stubborn with his approach, so you can't give him the full excuse.

[RockRaines]

I would trade Quentin of 2009 thats for sure.

[witesoxfan]

His BABIP was low because he wasn't hitting, which there were other reasons for. Had nothing to do with luck

 

.223 is ridiculously low, considering his career BABIP is .258. I could understand it being lower last year due to his flyball percentage being at its highest total - a flyball 47.2% of the time - but a 35 point drop is huge. His line-drive percentage was right around normal, and he actually had more infield hits than he did in 2008, which is lucky in its own right.

 

I think Quentin's a great candidate to bounce back and have an .875-.900 OPS season, and he could very easily put up more. Again, I think the only reason the Sox would consider a move like this is because they are convinced that he won't stay healthy.

[lostfan]

I can't post the full rant I usually do about BABIP but we can leave it at I'm not a believer in BABIP as a useful stat for hitters, and we don't need it to explain Carlos's aberrant stats last year.

Edited December 8, 2009 by lostfan

[LittleHurt05]

I'd prefer Crawford cause he is such more of a proven commodity. He has been playing well for several years. As much potential as CQ has to be an awesome middle of the lineup power guy, he still has only done it for one season, and he even got hurt for the last month of that year. If we keep getting 2008 CQ, then I'd keep him, but how can we be sure that will happen?

 

 

 

Just looked up CQ on baseballreference.com, awesome page sponsor!

Edited December 8, 2009 by LittleHurt05

[witesoxfan]

I can't post the full rant I usually do about BABIP but we can believe it at I'm not a believer in BABIP as a useful stat for hitters, and we don't need it to explain Carlos's aberrant stats last year.

 

All I think it does is help explain that his batting average was lower than normal. I'm not using it to say he is a good or bad hitter (he was unlucky this year, lucky in 2008), but I think, based on all of his peripherals, that he should have hit better than .230 and he didn't.

 

It's generally more useful with pitchers, because there is a relative standard set (even though it does still fluctuate a bit), but fluctuates with hitters because each hitter is different in his own way.

[Chisoxfn]

Sox Talking With Rays, Discuss Jenks and a Crawford for Quentin Swap

[Chisoxfn]

I can't post the full rant I usually do about BABIP but we can believe it at I'm not a believer in BABIP as a useful stat for hitters, and we don't need it to explain Carlos's aberrant stats last year.

BAPIP is a pretty big bull-s*** stat. I do think if you factor it in with line-drive rate and some other stuff that it can turn into a relatively decent piece of information though.

[Chisoxfn]

This deal makes zero sense. Maybe with other pieces, but it would put the Sox in a total financial mess.

[Jordan4life_2007]

BAPIP is a pretty big bull-s*** stat. I do think if you factor it in with line-drive rate and some other stuff that it can turn into a relatively decent piece of information though.

 

It's not a perfect stat (a perfect stat doesn't exist). And I think it's a far better tool to use when breaking down pitchers. But it can be very useful when breaking down hitters year-to-year performance.

[GoSox05]

What are some of the players the Sox might look to get from the Rays for Jenks?

[lostfan]

All I think it does is help explain that his batting average was lower than normal. I'm not using it to say he is a good or bad hitter (he was unlucky this year, lucky in 2008), but I think, based on all of his peripherals, that he should have hit better than .230 and he didn't.

 

It's generally more useful with pitchers, because there is a relative standard set (even though it does still fluctuate a bit), but fluctuates with hitters because each hitter is different in his own way.

For pitchers, yeah. I like it. For hitters, you're not wrong, but the fluctuations in BABIP almost always coincide with fluctuations in regular batting average, with or without the other stats (LD% etc.).

 

BAPIP is a pretty big bull-s*** stat. I do think if you factor it in with line-drive rate and some other stuff that it can turn into a relatively decent piece of information though.

This.

[chunk23]

For pitchers, yeah. I like it. For hitters, you're not wrong, but the fluctuations in BABIP almost always coincide with fluctuations in regular batting average, with or without the other stats (LD% etc.).

 

 

But, when looked at with other stats, BABIP can tell you why that fluctuation occurred. If BABIP dips but LD% stays the same, that could be chalked up to luck. If BA drops but BABIP doesn't, it's most likely that they're striking out more. If someone is having a breakout year, but their career BABIP is .250 and now it's .400, you can probably call it a fluke.

 

BABIP is a very useful stat when looked at with other stats. By itself, though, it tells you nothing.

Edited December 8, 2009 by chunk23

[lostfan]

But, when looked at with other stats, BABIP can tell you why that fluctuation occurred. If BABIP dips but LD% stays the same, that could be chalked up to luck. If BA drops but BABIP doesn't, it's most likely that they're striking out more. If someone is having a breakout year, but their career BABIP is .250 and now it's .400, you can probably call it a fluke.

 

BABIP is a very useful stat when looked at with other stats. By itself, though, it tells you nothing.

That's what I'm saying.

[southsider2k5]

.223 is ridiculously low, considering his career BABIP is .258. I could understand it being lower last year due to his flyball percentage being at its highest total - a flyball 47.2% of the time - but a 35 point drop is huge. His line-drive percentage was right around normal, and he actually had more infield hits than he did in 2008, which is lucky in its own right.

 

I think Quentin's a great candidate to bounce back and have an .875-.900 OPS season, and he could very easily put up more. Again, I think the only reason the Sox would consider a move like this is because they are convinced that he won't stay healthy.

 

I think the cart is going in front of the horse in this case. It isn't TCQs BABIP that indicated a bad year, it was a symptom of his bad year. The guy had a bad foot and couldn't drive off of that foot like he was accustomed to. This meant that everything he was hitting, wasn't getting hit with the same authority that he did in 2008 for example. The guy hit a bunch of lazy flyballs last year, that wouldn't have been the prior years, because he simply couldn't hit the ball with his usual authority.

 

Q wasn't unlucky last year, he was hurt. In 2008 he wasn't lucky, he was healthy. If he is healthy he will see all of those fancy statistics rebound. If he isn't, they will suck again.

[lostfan]

I think the cart is going in front of the horse in this case. It isn't TCQs BABIP that indicated a bad year, it was a symptom of his bad year. The guy had a bad foot and couldn't drive off of that foot like he was accustomed to. This meant that everything he was hitting, wasn't getting hit with the same authority that he did in 2008 for example. The guy hit a bunch of lazy flyballs last year, that wouldn't have been the prior years, because he simply couldn't hit the ball with his usual authority.

 

Q wasn't unlucky last year, he was hurt. In 2008 he wasn't lucky, he was healthy. If he is healthy he will see all of those fancy statistics rebound. If he isn't, they will suck again.

$$$

[balfanman]

In my best Hawk voice, "Don't tell me what ya hit, tell me when ya hit it!

 

[eickevinmorris]

That's what I'm saying.

I don't really think anyone is arguing that BABIP is a good statistic in isolation. Don't make up an argument to dispute.

[NorthSideSox72]

I don't really think anyone is arguing that BABIP is a good statistic in isolation. Don't make up an argument to dispute.

Kind of like jumping into the middle of a discussion and telling someone not to do something (which they didn't do anyway)?

 

[lostfan]

I don't really think anyone is arguing that BABIP is a good statistic in isolation. Don't make up an argument to dispute.

umm wtf are you talking about, please read the thread first before making a comment like this