What a disaster this rotating DH NL lineup idea is...

[NorthSideSox72]

Omar Vizquel hits 2nd tonight.

What the heck does that have to do with the DH? He isn't DH'ing, right?

 

[greg775]

Should it be forgotten? No. Should people stop dwelling on 2005? Yes.

 

Nobody's dwelling on 2005 though it might be the only WS you see in your lifetime.

[Steve9347]

What the heck does that have to do with the DH? He isn't DH'ing, right?

Oh no, this all relates to Ozzie's inability to optimize a lineup.

[elrockinMT]

Don't know if we should fire Ozzie or not, but I would push for another bat.

 

KW's additona of Pierre and Kotsay and Vizquel have done little for the offense. But, as the eternal optimist says there s still time to show us they were good moves. If Pierre could get on more think of the number of SB's that guy would have and he leads the majors as it is. However, my preference was always Pods over Pierre

[ThunderBolt]

KW's additona of Pierre and Kotsay and Vizquel have done little for the offense. But, as the eternal optimist says there s still time to show us they were good moves. If Pierre could get on more think of the number of SB's that guy would have and he leads the majors as it is. However, my preference was always Pods over Pierre

The eternal optimist in you tells you that giving significant at-bats to an injury-hobbled backup 1b and a defensivley minded utilty man will prove to be good moves? Especially, when giving at-bats to these people was the justification behind not bringing back Jim Thome?

Edited May 7, 2010 by Thunderbolt

[caulfield12]

Let's not forget how completely ineffective Vizquel has been, while getting many many more at-bats than he deserves over Jayson Nix...

[Balta1701]

Let's not forget how completely ineffective Vizquel has been, while getting many many more at-bats than he deserves over Jayson Nix...

However, let's forget how Nix hasn't done anything to earn any at bats either.

[caulfield12]

You don't think Nix earned the benefit of the doubt with his power numbers against LHP last year??

 

You'd really rather see Vizquel out there at age 43, probably in his final season....than Jayson Nix?

 

Hmmmm.....yes, I know Marcum's a RHP, but does it really feel like Omar Vizquel can go on a hot streak offensively?

Edited May 7, 2010 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

You don't think Nix earned the benefit of the doubt with his power numbers against LHP last year??

 

You'd really rather see Vizquel out there at age 43, probably in his final season....than Jayson Nix?

 

Hmmmm.....yes, I know Marcum's a RHP, but does it really feel like Omar Vizquel can go on a hot streak offensively?

Against RHP last year, Nix put up a .621 OPS, Vizquel a .577.

 

Against LHP last year, Nix put up a .822 OPS. Vizquel, a 1.029. (only 33 at bats).

 

Frankly, there really is no good answer here. You're arguing that I should care about what brand of bullet I get shot in the head with. Either way, the result is the same.

[ThunderBolt]

Against RHP last year, Nix put up a .621 OPS, Vizquel a .577.

 

Against LHP last year, Nix put up a .822 OPS. Vizquel, a 1.029. (only 33 at bats).

 

Frankly, there really is no good answer here. You're arguing that I should care about what brand of bullet I get shot in the head with. Either way, the result is the same.

The answer is that you play the young guy, because the older guy has nothing to prove and offers no long-term value to the team. You see what you have in a guy like Nix, Vizquel is a know commodity.

[Balta1701]

The answer is that you play the young guy, because the older guy has nothing to prove and offers no long-term value to the team. You see what you have in a guy like Nix, Vizquel is a know commodity.

Unless you also believe that the older guy is an upgrade on defense.

[ThunderBolt]

Unless you also believe that the older guy is an upgrade on defense.

In that case you hit the old guy 9th, instead of 2nd. Or simply put him in, in the later innings for defensive purposes, both of which our manager refuses to do, thusly making the old guy a detriment to the team.

[caulfield12]

I don't see how Vizquel at 43 is an upgrade defensively over Nix at 2B.

 

SS and 3B, glad to defer to Omar...but Nix is a better 2B IMO.

[southsider2k5]

I don't see how Vizquel at 43 is an upgrade defensively over Nix at 2B.

 

SS and 3B, glad to defer to Omar...but Nix is a better 2B IMO.

 

Age has nothing to do with defensive ability.

[caulfield12]

Tell that to Ken Griffey, Jr., Magglio Ordonez, Carlos Guillen or Jermaine Dye.

[southsider2k5]

Tell that to Ken Griffey, Jr., Magglio Ordonez, Carlos Guillen or Jermaine Dye.

 

Just because you are old, doesn't mean you are a worse defender than someone young.

[caulfield12]

It has been proven by numerous studies that the peak offensively and defensively (with artificial enhancements) for every MLB player should be between 27-30 years old.

 

Yes, just because you're young (see Josh Fields, Chris Getz or Mark Teahen) doesn't make you good at anything in particular.

 

But there's NO WAY that Omar Vizquel hasn't lost something defensively if you go back and compare his range and athleticism (not to mention arm strength) to the year 2000 tape.

[Balta1701]

Yes, just because you're young (see Josh Fields, Chris Getz or Mark Teahen or Jayson Nix) doesn't make you good at anything in particular.

 

[ThunderBolt]

Your campaign against Jayson Nix is very odd. No one is arguing that he’s a world beater. The only argument for Jayson Nix is that he has certain strengths that Ozzie refuses to not only recognize but use properly. The fact is, is that Jayson Nix was regarded as the “messiah of defense” coming out of the minors. Like most young players he’s had trouble adjusting to the major leagues. That being said, he’s certainly shown enough to play before Omar at this point in both players respective careers.

[southsider2k5]

It has been proven by numerous studies that the peak offensively and defensively (with artificial enhancements) for every MLB player should be between 27-30 years old.

 

Yes, just because you're young (see Josh Fields, Chris Getz or Mark Teahen) doesn't make you good at anything in particular.

 

But there's NO WAY that Omar Vizquel hasn't lost something defensively if you go back and compare his range and athleticism (not to mention arm strength) to the year 2000 tape.

 

But that in no sense means he is worse than Nix, just because he is 43.

[Balta1701]

Your campaign against Jayson Nix is very odd. No one is arguing that he’s a world beater. The only argument for Jayson Nix is that he has certain strengths that Ozzie refuses to not only recognize but use properly. The fact is, is that Jayson Nix was regarded as the “messiah of defense” coming out of the minors. Like most young players he’s had trouble adjusting to the major leagues. That being said, he’s certainly shown enough to play before Omar at this point in both players respective careers.

Really, I don't find it odd at all. I find myself really not caring, and being somewhat startled by how fully people can be overwhelmed with adoration for 1 guy hitting under .200 compared to another.

[witesoxfan]

It has been proven by numerous studies that the peak offensively and defensively (with artificial enhancements) for every MLB player should be between 27-30 years old.

 

Yes, just because you're young (see Josh Fields, Chris Getz or Mark Teahen) doesn't make you good at anything in particular.

 

But there's NO WAY that Omar Vizquel hasn't lost something defensively if you go back and compare his range and athleticism (not to mention arm strength) to the year 2000 tape.

 

And there are also numbers that indicate that Vizquel is still just fine defensively.

 

Sure, Vizquel has lost something, but when you were the very best, falling off can (and in this case, has proven) to mean you are just very good defensively.

[Dick Allen]

And there are also numbers that indicate that Vizquel is still just fine defensively.

 

Sure, Vizquel has lost something, but when you were the very best, falling off can (and in this case, has proven) to mean you are just very good defensively.

I'm no Jason Nix fan, but Vizquel playing 2B is really not an upgrade defensively and Omar brings nothing to the table offensively at this point. Nix may run into one.

[caulfield12]

This is like the lesser of two evils argument....pathetic we're even having it.

 

Like which was the worst disaster, 9/11 or the Titanic.

 

No matter what we do, seemingly, we're screwed. There's not really a bright light or even dim light at the end of the tunnel...except for the fact that the Royals and Indians MIGHT actually be worse than us, although we certainly haven't proven we're better than CLE on the field this season.

 

And we have the #13 pick in the draft, if we don't mess it up, lol.

Edited May 8, 2010 by caulfield12

[fathom]

And there are also numbers that indicate that Vizquel is still just fine defensively.

 

Sure, Vizquel has lost something, but when you were the very best, falling off can (and in this case, has proven) to mean you are just very good defensively.

 

Vizquel has no range at 2nd base