Dick Allen Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (PWSox87 @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 01:03 PM) He's among the fastest 2 or 3 guys in the majors, possibly the fastest and that translates to stolen bases bc he's good at that too. He's worth about a half win to a full win on the bases alone (a win = 10 runs above average). In the field, he is among the best center fielders in mlb. All the fielding numbers say he's top 3 CF minus his whack arm. He's pretty much a slap hitter, ops'd around .850 for his minor league career but that doesn't seem reachable in the bigs bc he can be over powered by fastballs. Overall 5 years of control of him would appeal to me a lot and I think the yanks under value him bc so much of his value is tied to his defense. he looks to be comfortably a 2.5-3.5 win player, which means he is a legit starting OF and upgrade for the white sox. I don't know where you got your minor league OPS numbers but Baseball Reference has them a lot lower than you posted. In fact is minor league numbers are eerily similar to one Jerry Owens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 01:50 PM) I don't know where you got your minor league OPS numbers but Baseball Reference has them a lot lower than you posted. In fact is minor league numbers are eerily similar to one Jerry Owens. .289/.389/.383/.772 Not quite .850. In order to get up to .850 with a ~.100 iso he'd either have to put up a .470 OBP or hit .370. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (PWSox87 @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 01:31 PM) yes Yeah, you can't do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 01:55 PM) Yeah, you can't do that. You gotta admire his persistence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 (edited) QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 01:55 PM) .289/.389/.383/.772 Not quite .850. In order to get up to .850 with a ~.100 iso he'd either have to put up a .470 OBP or hit .370. And Owens' minor league numbers are: .296/.364/.368/.732 Everyone is talking about his glove. The White Sox spent a ton of money on a CF with a sweet glove. The Sox need offense people. Edited December 12, 2009 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 02:01 PM) And Owens' minor league numbers are: .296/.364/.368/.732 Everyone is talking about his glove. The White Sox spent a ton of money on a CF with a sweet glove. The Sox need offense people. Yeah but that CF with a sweet glove is also one of the best right fielders in the game and despite what some have said in this thread there is incredible value in that. I'd have no problem moving Rios to right if we acquired another very good centerfielder, the more outfield defense the better. We're likely to end up with a bantam speedster somewhere on the diamond for the purposes of leading off, I'd rather he be capable of playing an above average centerfield than be limited to left or DH (frightening Podsednik scenario). A run saved on defense is equal to a run scored on offense. If the Mariners had any kind of offense last year they could have made it work. Of course, that's just what I assume will happen. Personally I want the 2 best possible baseball players to fill the 2 final spots in the lineup regardless of their ability to hit leadoff. Put together the best 25 man roster that the budget will allow and figure out how the pieces fit later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 02:27 PM) Yeah but that CF with a sweet glove is also one of the best right fielders in the game and despite what some have said in this thread there is incredible value in that. I'd have no problem moving Rios to right if we acquired another very good centerfielder, the more outfield defense the better. We're likely to end up with a bantam speedster somewhere on the diamond for the purposes of leading off, I'd rather he be capable of playing an above average centerfield than be limited to left or DH (frightening Podsednik scenario). A run saved on defense is equal to a run scored on offense. If the Mariners had any kind of offense last year they could have made it work. Of course, that's just what I assume will happen. Personally I want the 2 best possible baseball players to fill the 2 final spots in the lineup regardless of their ability to hit leadoff. Put together the best 25 man roster that the budget will allow and figure out how the pieces fit later. If Rios is the Rios of the past 2 season offensively, you need a much bigger bat than Brett Gardner roaming next to him in OF at USCF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 02:45 PM) If Rios is the Rios of the past 2 season offensively, you need a much bigger bat than Brett Gardner roaming next to him in OF at USCF. That's not going to stop them from finding a speedy, weak leadoff hitter. If he hits like he did in '08 -- ~.350 wOBA -- we find a big bat for DH and Quentin doesn't suck we could be alright but I want that slappy leadoff man to be a very good defender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 I dont think this is the player they are targeting to be honest. I'm betting this offseason we unload a few prospects for a vet bat. And then sign one more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWhiteSoxinNJ Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 An 11 page thread on Brett Gardner? Seriously? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (AWhiteSoxinNJ @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 03:22 PM) An 11 page thread on Brett Gardner? Seriously? 10 more pages to go until you complain about it again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (AWhiteSoxinNJ @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 03:22 PM) An 11 page thread on Brett Gardner? Seriously? To be fair, it wouldn't have gotten this far without people like you complaining about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWhiteSoxinNJ Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 05:01 PM) To be fair, it wouldn't have gotten this far without people like you complaining about it. I forgot, Brett Gardner is GOD....Give me a break. He's a dime a dozen player that can't hit.... If they wanted a player like that, they wouldn't of traded Getz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 QUOTE (AWhiteSoxinNJ @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 07:42 PM) I forgot, Brett Gardner is GOD....Give me a break. He's a dime a dozen player that can't hit.... If they wanted a player like that, they wouldn't of traded Getz. Its midwinter player discussion, and it was pertinent to the Winter Meeting discussion. If you dont like it, dont comment. There is no need to keep hitting threads with your crappy one liners complaining about the discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daggins Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Ryan Langerhans was non tendered by the M's. He is basically Gardner without the stolen bases but with a better arm. If they take a flyer on someone, why not the guy who will be almost free? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderBolt Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 QUOTE (daggins @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 10:00 PM) He is basically Gardner without the stolen bases but with a better arm. So, basically he's not Gardner. Gardner speed is a pretty big factor in this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 QUOTE (AWhiteSoxinNJ @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 07:42 PM) I forgot, Brett Gardner is GOD....Give me a break. He's a dime a dozen player that can't hit.... If they wanted a player like that, they wouldn't of traded Getz. And that is why you get a 12 page thread... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daggins Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 As long as theres a plus defender to go with Rios I don't care what his name is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiddleCoastBias Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 QUOTE (daggins @ Dec 13, 2009 -> 04:29 AM) As long as theres a plus defender to go with Rios I don't care what his name is. First off, from what I've read, I do think that this kid is worth a small investment given his potential for a big return. But I've got to play devil's advocate here: it sounds like we're going for just defense and speed here, eerily reminiscent of one Brian Anderson. I was never a fan of BA but I will treat this like an AA meeting and announce: hello, I was a Jerry Owens supporter. But the principle remains the same: BA, JO, DWise, we've tried this 'fast, defense' mold before (with the exception of JO, he just ran fast in circles). I love the IDEA of Gardner growing into his potential of awesome speed and defense and we can forgive his bat, but I feel like we've been down this road before. I'm a hesitant supporter, as long as we don't invest too much and we don't get too attached, giving him CF like it was his birthright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daggins Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 The problem there is that if the Sox acquire Gardner, it will be to start in CF or LF. There isn't really any hiding that. The alternative that I can see is getting a guy like Luke Scott and just assuming that Becks will be the leadoff guy, since i'm guessing all the money/positions will be gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daggins Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Also I don't have projections on hand, but i'm guessing no one projected Jerry Owens or Brian Anderson to be a 2.7 WAR player going in to any season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Now Cowley is saying the Sox are thinking Juan Pierre. If he throws out all the names and one comes to the Sox he will be the guy that knew all along. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 13, 2009 -> 09:35 AM) Now Cowley is saying the Sox are thinking Juan Pierre. If he throws out all the names and one comes to the Sox he will be the guy that knew all along. Well he isnt a trekkie in his moms basement and he knows stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWhiteSoxinNJ Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 11:07 PM) And that is why you get a 12 page thread... And your posts are helping? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 QUOTE (AWhiteSoxinNJ @ Dec 13, 2009 -> 10:31 AM) And your posts are helping? he at least argued the merits of the situation where you provided nothing. and still provide nothing. This topic is dead to you, stop commenting and ruining the thread, your opinion is known. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.