Who are you pulling for as the DH?

[Dick Allen]

I'm definitely on the Jack Cust for DH train. Yeah his average is going to be low but he'll walk 100 times (or thereabouts) with great power. I think he'd be a near perfect fit for us.

Why would he be an improvement over Thome?

[pktmotion]

Why would he be an improvement over Thome?

Both Cust and Thome would be good choices for DH. But Cust is less of an injury liability.

[Ozzie Ball]

Why would he be an improvement over Thome?

He wouldn't necessarily be. But he is younger and not as injury prone. I'd be fine with either Cust or Thome.

[NorthSideSox72]

I'll take base-clogging if it's at a .370+ clip. And, as slow as Thome is, he's a solid baserunner.

 

There was also the thought that bringing Swisher in was going to improve his homer totals, but that proved false. The Coliseum is much bigger than the Cell and will sometimes allow for better averages. It's entirely possible that Cust would come in and do exactly what Swisher did - they are pretty similar players.

 

I will take better hitters who may be older and more injury prone rather than a fresher player who is very likely to be worse.

Want to emphasize the bolded. Thome is not only a smart baserunner, he also wasn't the slowest baserunner on the team last year. Konerko takes that crown. A couple years back, I'd put Crede behind Thome in terms of effective speed on the bases as well.

 

Thome is slow, but he isn't quite as bad a baserunner as he's sometimes characterized. And he hustles.

 

[Heads22]

Never, ever faulted big Jim for lack of hustle. The big guy always ran hard.

[VAfan]

I'd vote for Carlos Delgado, who just got a hit rehabbing in some winter league. He's 37, coming off hip surgery, so he'd likely be cheap enough.

[chisoxfan09]

I'd vote for Carlos Delgado, who just got a hit rehabbing in some winter league. He's 37, coming off hip surgery, so he'd likely be cheap enough.

 

It looks like the Mets are looking seriously to bring Delgado back.

 

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/met...lgado-1.1683971

 

 

[Balta1701]

It looks like the Mets are looking seriously to bring Delgado back.

 

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/met...lgado-1.1683971

With their monetary resources I don't know why they wouldn't target Laroche.

[chetkincaid]

I'm definitely on the Jack Cust for DH train. Yeah his average is going to be low but he'll walk 100 times (or thereabouts) with great power. I think he'd be a near perfect fit for us.

 

 

Cust struck out 197 times in 08 and 185 times in 09. Strike outs are rally killers. No thank you.

[bmags]

you know what's also a rally killer? Having no one on base.

[Texsox]

you know what's also a rally killer? Having no one on base.

 

[soxfan3530]

you know what's also a rally killer? Having no one on base.

do you know what sparks rallies? home runs! i will take cust.

[Buehrlesque]

He wouldn't necessarily be. But he is younger and not as injury prone. I'd be fine with either Cust or Thome.

I might be in the minority, but I would be disappointed if we brought in Cust. I know his power/OBP numbers look good on a stat sheet, but this is a good example of how stats don't tell the whole story. In a close game, if you had a runner on third with one out, or a runner on second with two out, is Jack Freaking Cust really a guy you want with the bat in his hands? He's a 31-year-old with a career .239 batting average. He can walk, but he doesn't have much speed (4 stolen bases... in his CAREER) and is not a better baserunner than even Jim Thome. His one advantage is that a bunch of his lazy fly balls that were outs in Oakland will travel over the fence at the Cell.

 

But how is he any different than Nick Swisher? Low average, high OBP guy who K's a lot and projects to "improve" by getting out of Oakland. Swisher was the better player, and got run out of town here, how the heck is Cust going to make it?

 

PASS. Jack Cust is a Ron Schueler signing. KW will bring in a real baseball player.

[Ozzie Ball]

Cust struck out 197 times in 08 and 185 times in 09. Strike outs are rally killers. No thank you.

And walks are rally starters.

[Ozzie Ball]

I might be in the minority, but I would be disappointed if we brought in Cust. I know his power/OBP numbers look good on a stat sheet, but this is a good example of how stats don't tell the whole story. In a close game, if you had a runner on third with one out, or a runner on second with two out, is Jack Freaking Cust really a guy you want with the bat in his hands? He's a 31-year-old with a career .239 batting average. He can walk, but he doesn't have much speed (4 stolen bases... in his CAREER) and is not a better baserunner than even Jim Thome. His one advantage is that a bunch of his lazy fly balls that were outs in Oakland will travel over the fence at the Cell.

 

But how is he any different than Nick Swisher? Low average, high OBP guy who K's a lot and projects to "improve" by getting out of Oakland. Swisher was the better player, and got run out of town here, how the heck is Cust going to make it?

 

PASS. Jack Cust is a Ron Schueler signing. KW will bring in a real baseball player.

I think trying to account for every possible scenario is an impossible and therefore pointless exercise. Of course it would be ideal to have a .300+ hitter at the plate in the bottom of the ninth with two outs, a runner on 2nd and in a tie game. If you're setting your team up every day to account for that situation, however, you're going to lose out in the long run. If I'm a GM, I'm filling my team with players who are going to make outs at the lowest rate while bringing some power to picture. Why? Because OPS and wOBA are much better run predictors than batting average is.

 

Sure, in the situation that you listed, Jack Cust would be a far from ideal man to have up at the plate, but that one specific situation will only account for a tiny portion of your PA's over the course of a season. The more effective way of scoring runs is by not making outs and hitting for power, and if that comes with a bundle of strikeouts then so be it.

 

As for Swisher, surely his bounce back with the Yanks proves that he simply had a down year with the Sox. His lack of production is in no way, shape or form a predictor of what would happen to Cust if Kenny were to acquire him.

[JuiceCruz16]

I think trying to account for every possible scenario is an impossible and therefore pointless exercise. Of course it would be ideal to have a .300+ hitter at the plate in the bottom of the ninth with two outs, a runner on 2nd and in a tie game. If you're setting your team up every day to account for that situation, however, you're going to lose out in the long run. If I'm a GM, I'm filling my team with players who are going to make outs at the lowest rate while bringing some power to picture. Why? Because OPS and wOBA are much better run predictors than batting average is.

 

Sure, in the situation that you listed, Jack Cust would be a far from ideal man to have up at the plate, but that one specific situation will only account for a tiny portion of your PA's over the course of a season. The more effective way of scoring runs is by not making outs and hitting for power, and if that comes with a bundle of strikeouts then so be it.

 

As for Swisher, surely his bounce back with the Yanks proves that he simply had a down year with the Sox. His lack of production is in no way, shape or form a predictor of what would happen to Cust if Kenny were to acquire him.

Nick Swisher was not very good for the Yankees either. He had a good start, and pretty much sucked ass from there on out. The Yanks can have him if that is his bounceback year!

[chunk23]

Nick Swisher was not very good for the Yankees either. He had a good start, and pretty much sucked ass from there on out. The Yanks can have him if that is his bounceback year!

 

He may have been inconsistent, but he still managed a better OPS than any of our OF last year.

 

Edit: plus I wouldn't call a 2nd half OPS of .924 sucking. I wish KW had either kept him or never traded for him. It'd be nice to have Sweeney out there, and Gio's peripherals indicate he should do much better next year.

 

 

Back on topic, Cust isn't ideal, but I would rather have someone with a high OBP at the plate in a close game than any other player profile.

Edited January 5, 2010 by chunk23

[Ozzie Ball]

Nick Swisher was not very good for the Yankees either. He had a good start, and pretty much sucked ass from there on out. The Yanks can have him if that is his bounceback year!

Pre All-Star break: .237/.360/.464 (.824)

Post All-Star break: .263/.384/.540 (.924)

 

But why should we look at facts when we can pull our opinions out of thin air?

 

His numbers with the Yankees were at least in line with his Oakland numbers, if not better. If you want to argue whether he was a good player in Oakland, then that's another debate, but he did bounce back with the Yankees and he was very good. His 3.5 WAR would have ranked 1st amongst our offensive players and 2nd overall behind Floyd.

[JuiceCruz16]

Pre All-Star break: .237/.360/.464 (.824)

Post All-Star break: .263/.384/.540 (.924)

 

But why should we look at facts when we can pull our opinions out of thin air?

 

His numbers with the Yankees were at least in line with his Oakland numbers, if not better. If you want to argue whether he was a good player in Oakland, then that's another debate, but he did bounce back with the Yankees and he was very good. His 3.5 WAR would have ranked 1st amongst our offensive players and 2nd overall behind Floyd.

I stand corrected on his nice start, I seem to recall a quick first month of the season sticking out in my mind. Yes, his stats fell back to Oakland form ( the wind tunnel in new Yankee Stadium was helpful), where he did not impress me either! You can keep that crap. He was a butcher in the outfield for the Yanks, as a fill in guy he is ok, but he seemed to think he is more then that with the Sox, so once again gladly the Yanks can have him.

 

 

 

[southsider2k5]

I stand corrected on his nice start, I seem to recall a quick first month of the season sticking out in my mind. Yes, his stats fell back to Oakland form ( the wind tunnel in new Yankee Stadium was helpful), where he did not impress me either! You can keep that crap. He was a butcher in the outfield for the Yanks, as a fill in guy he is ok, but he seemed to think he is more then that with the Sox, so once again gladly the Yanks can have him.

 

And he was so impressive down the stretch he got benched, for the second year in a row.

[ThunderBolt]

And he was so impressive down the stretch he got benched, for the second year in a row.

That's odd because according to Baseball Reference Swish played 27 of the last 31 game of the season from September to October. In fact, he missed one game during the last two weeks of the season. That was a game on the 23rd of September against the Angels if you're curious. He was pretty dodgy in the playoffs, but that’s an issue of sample size. Would you care to back up your statement?

Edited January 5, 2010 by Thunderbolt

[balfanman]

do you know what sparks rallies? home runs! i will take cust.

 

I always viewed home runs as more of a rally killer. Aren't rallies usually over when someone hits a home run? As Ed Farmer says "let's keep the line moving".

[Thad Bosley]

No way, no way, no way on Jack Cust. He strikes out way too much, to the tune of almost 33% of the time he's come to the plate over the course of his career. That compares rather dismally to Thome's rate of nearly 25% of the time throughout his career, and that rate is obviously already on the high side. Cust would have to be a guaranteed 40+ home run, 100+ RBI guy to tolerate such an exhorbitant amount of K's, which of course at this point in his career he is not such a guarantee at all. No, we've already added one strikeout machine to the line-up in the form of Mark Teahan. I would certainly hope we don't add another in Cust.

[southsider2k5]

That's odd because according to Baseball Reference Swish played 27 of the last 31 game of the season from September to October. In fact, he missed one game during the last two weeks of the season. That was a game on the 23rd of September against the Angels if you're curious. He was pretty dodgy in the playoffs, but that’s an issue of sample size. Would you care to back up your statement?

 

Google it.

[ThunderBolt]

I always viewed home runs as more of a rally killer. Aren't rallies usually over when someone hits a home run? As Ed Farmer says "let's keep the line moving".

Home-runs are the most efficient way of scoring runs for a lineup. I see nothing wrong with modeling an offense to optimize these chances. I'm not suggesting we get a bunch of guys to swing for the fences, instead, we need to surround these people with players who can get on base and be driven in.