qwerty

QUOTE(Jordan4life_2005 @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 03:56 PM) Define "done s***"? Shaq averaged 23, 11, nearly 3 blocks on 60% shooting last season. You don't think the Lakers could've used that last year? And he's puttin up some pretty good numbers now since he's been back. He's still easily the best center in the game. He still commands double and triple teams on a nightly basis. It's not a coincidence that the Heat were just 9-9 while Shaq was out. He looks nothing like he use to in the past. His man to man defense resembles curry's at this point and sure he gets blocks but it is not because he is the fierce help defender he once use to be. He has lost some steps and it shows up. Defense is half the game and he is no longer like he once was. Forgive me for not thinking his numbers demand 20-30 million a season ( no one does and especially not this version of shaq). This guy could have been that much greater if he was ever able to avoid the injury bug he has had his whole career. It is understandable though considering his massive size and how hard he goes at the game.

QUOTE(sayitaintso @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 03:16 PM) Roger Clemens was. I am saying position players... along with pitchers.

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 03:14 PM) You don't waste a top prospect for a full season in the majors as a fourth outfielder. You may as well keep him at AAA if that's the scenario. Realistically i do not understand this and never will. Players have and will always be eased into the starting role. Believe it or not... not every starter in the majors was always a starter.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 03:07 PM) What "protection" does Taveras need? Protection from walks? Hell, you WANT to put Taveras on base. He stole 34 last year! I'm not saying that Anderson is going to be a bust and I wish the guy all the luck in the world. But if the Sox could get a CF with more than 13 games of ML experience who is very good defensively, has great speed on the bases, and isn't a liability at the plate, I think they'd be better off. He could bat 9th if needed. It would have to be for the right price, of course. What are we really looking for from our centerfielder this year? Either way anderson is very good defensively. He will be one of our three fastest guys... he is a good base runner... just not a base stealer. He will struggle with the bat but in the end all that the sox are looking for is really good defense from him, which they will get.

QUOTE(AirScott @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 03:06 PM) if you remember all the way back to the World Series, Taveras was batting 2nd for the 'Stros, on account that he only walked 25 times in 592 ABs in the regular season and Biggio was a better OBP guy. so's Pods. Ok... well like i said he still batted in the lead-off spot the majority of the year ( over 500 times).

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 03:05 PM) I suppose Brandon McCarthy should be sent to the curb as well? Why should we let him develop this year either? I say we trade him off for someone who is more proven. Brandon backe anyone?

QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:59 PM) I'm sorry, are the Sox rebuilding and developing young players this year? I must've missed the memo. :rolly Yes, you are correct. No team in the history of baseball that has made the playoffs or won the world series went on to have a rookie start for them the following year. Ohh...

QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:58 PM) Who said that he would replace Pods as a leadoff hitter? He batted lead-off last year no? That is what they are trying to groom him to become no? That is what he was in the minors no?

QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:55 PM) LMFAO at the homers who are "overrating" a player who hasn't really played in the majors yet. No one is overating anderson. You are the one that does not even want to give him a chance. Like others have said ... did you think taveras deserved to be the astros starting centerfielder in 2005 after his 2004 season?

QUOTE(Felix @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:49 PM) In the first half of the year, his SB% was 83%. In the second half of the year, his SB% was 52%. When did he help the team more, the first or second half? This is just great.^^^ Podsednik was pitiful in the second half when it came to running the bases let alone steal bases.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:44 PM) Ah yes, the ole' "well you answer this before I answer yours." I'd much rather see BA take a hit in average if it meant his OBP for an entire season wasn't a crappy .325. How many of Taveras' "hits" were bunt singles in the infield? Brian is not the same type of hitter as Taveras which is why I expect him to have an OPS at least 100 points great than Taveras next season. Why is hitting .291 such a big deal to you? It's nothing out of this world with the exception that the player's OBP is only .325. Brady Anderson hit 50 homers in a season before. Maybe we should get him on the line to play CF. We "all" don't know that BA could be Borchard part II because he hasn't had a chance to play an entire season like Taveras. Sheesh, give him a chance before you throw him overboard. How confiendt were you in Taveras for 2005 after hitting .000 in 2004? 150 of his 172 hits were singles, 70 were infield singles, and 29 of those were bunt hits... he led the league in both categories. If he could raise his obp to the .350-.360 range he would be that much more dangerous... right now he is more so meh.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:38 PM) Pierre's CAREER stolen percentage is 73%. Way to cherry-pick one years' stats to support your bad argument. :rolly That's right. You have no concrete evidence. I'm sorry it's the best you can do because it's a laughably weak argument. I am not cherry picking anything ( you really like that word btw). 73%? Thought you knew what i was talking about and did not have to make it known. 73% is still not good enough to help your team consistently. You want some really good base stealers... guys that actually help their team? Beltran... abreu... you have to be over 80% if you even think about it. Look up anything you want on base stealing and you will see 70%'s is nothing special. I cannot believe how little you know about scouting reports the first year into the league compared to the next. It is drastically different. So many players go through a rough second year and it surely is not a coincidence. Or is it? Realistically i do not care about pierre that much. There was a fourty page thread on him for some reason before and i will never know why.

QUOTE(Felix @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:25 PM) Rowands 2005 RAR (Runs above Replacement): 27 Pierres 2005 RAR: 12 Look at literally just about any defensive stat around. Rowand >>>>>> Pierre.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:21 PM) Rowand certainly has the advantage with power and slugging percentage, but that doesn't matter because Pierre's a leadoff hitter. Pierre's career OBP is 20 points higher and he's averaged close to 55 stolen bases/season over the past 5 years. Pods very clearly showed us how much of an impact a proficient base-stealer can have on a team. And the difference in defense is less than you think it is. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one, but I'm sticking with Pierre. This is nothing but speculation and prejudice on your part. You have absolutely no concrete evidence to back it up, yet continue argue the point for some unknown reason. It's a laughably weak argument, especially for someone who claims to have such faith in statistical analysis. What makes you think that Anderson will be able to hit anywhere near Taveras' .291? At least Taveras has done it before over the course of a full season. Anderson hasn't done anything in the majors For all we know, he could be Joe Borchard, Part II. Anderson's still a giant question mark. Call me crazy, but I'd rather play the guy who's actually done it at the major league level before... especially when I'm making another run at the WS. Jesus christ. 65% stealing bases in no way, shape, or form ends up helping your team in the long run. Difference in defense is less than i think? Most f***ing important part of the game ( ever hear of a pitcher?) especially when you were as strong up the middle as the sox were with uribe and rowand. No one team could match that... and if willie was playing at second too, no team could come close to the defensive prowess up the middle. No concrete evidence? Well how about for one a s*** load of players go through sophmore slumps before that can get on with a successful career. Or that the batter usually has the advantage of the pitchers the first couple times around. The second season in pitchers have a much better handle on how to get guys out. Coming up from the minors the scouting report is much more limited than anything in the major league level. You should basically never look at a lead-off mans ops but .666 in one of the best hitting parks around? His away numbers are really a better way to see what he is capable of because he is in all sort of enviroments and dimensions. Only think he does well is play defense and runs the bases very well, he is a smart, heads up player.

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:14 PM) Right, it's an opinion. Stats can be interpreted in accordance with one's opinion of the player. Happens here all the time ... that's the point. No stats needed for pierre's defense. You watch him out there and he might be even more painful to watch than podsednik... and we all know about podsednik. Ask marlins fans how fun he is to watch out there.

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:04 PM) Nope, he's got his opinions and he is standing up to all the stat geeks. The other guy doesn't understand the context of the conversation and argues a totally different point than is being discussed. It's a big difference. Stat geeks... ok. It is just common sense actually.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:01 PM) How exactly does a 65% SB% help you win more games? When you're getting thrown out 35% of the times you steal a base, you're hurting your team more than you're helping it. The downside to stealing bases is greater than it is not to. But no one here will ever believe it ( well most). http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2607

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 01:59 PM) I like your style, way to stick to your guns. Even if you are wrong you might as well keep going at it until it is rehashed as much as vafan's thoughts i suppose.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 01:57 PM) Way to cherry-pick stats. Apparently you've never heard of on-base percentage. Or stolen bases, for that matter. How badly did the Sox slip in August when Pods was injured? How much better were they offensively when he was healthy? The homerism here is absolutely ridiculous at times... "Aaron Rowand is a better player than Juan Pierre!" "Willie Taveras will certainy experience a sophomore slump because... er... because I said so!" "Even if Brian Anderson is a bust, he'll still be better than Taveras was this past season!" :rolly Cherry pick stats? Do you by chance know what era+ is and what it takes into account? Homerism... haha. You seriously said that to the least homerific person on this site. Rowand truely is more valuable to a team than pierre. Sorry. When i have made predictions in the past on who will slump i have usually be right on. I may be wrong with taveras but i doubt it... sure as hell no he will not exceed last years numbers.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 01:46 PM) Win-share stats don't mean everything. They're dependent upon too many other variables. Given the significantly greater interest in Pierre than Rowand this offseason, it appears that most GMs don't take them to seriously either. Rowand was a freaking rally-killer at the plate and on the bases at time this year. I'll take the small sacrifice in defense for the extra offensive boost that Pierre would provide. It is not just win shares... nearly every stastical analysis will show who was more valuable the past two years. Sabre people especially like rowand over pierre. Small sacrafice on defense... holy s***. Rowand's ops+ 93. Pierre's ops+ 84. There was no ''offensive boost'' to be had.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 01:41 PM) I disagree. Pierre's base-stealing prowess and higher OBP win more games. This is simply not true. Not many would agree with this so i will just let it be as there is really no arguement.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 01:31 PM) Talk about "huffing gas." Not quite... QUOTE(Cerbaho-WG @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 01:34 PM) So you consider long, loopy throws missing cutoff men a cannon? Sammy's throws have so much arc that they travel farther, which isn't indicative of a cannon, rather he just has poor arm strength and throws the ball higher to get more distance. There is no question that he use to have a strong arm. Problem was he would over throw anything and everything and teams would try and run on him all day. Just like teams should be doing with vlad... because believe it or not, contrary to what ''experts'' try to make the common baseball fan think, vlad's are is not special. As you can see i never said he had a ''cannon'', all that i said was it use to be strong, which is indeed the case. Not many players can make throws from the wall/warning track to the pitcher mound region accurate or not... and he use to be one of them.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 01:09 PM) I'm not backtracking at all. He has an average arm that is statistically skewed by the fact that he plays in an enormous outfield. I can't imagine how many sac flies (rather than HRs) are hit into deep left-center in that ballpark. And Pierre takes the heat (statistically) for letting a runner advance on a 400-ft fly ball. Outside of their arms, Pierre and Damon are both solid defensive CFs. It's difficult to imagine that a guy as small as pierre would have a cannon for an arm anyway. Arm strength isn't everything. Look at Sammy. He has a freaking rifle for an arm, but did it make him a good defensive player? No, he'd throw the ball into the freaking 3rd-base stands while trying to gun down a runner. I'll say it again: I'll take Pierre in a heartbeat over a better defensive player like Rowand. Rowand's defense wins you more games than pierre does period. They both had 11.6 win shares offensively and rowand was in the top ten defensively and pierre comes in at about 150. Plan and simple pierre is not a very good fielder.

QUOTE(Cerbaho-WG @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 01:25 PM) I'm dead serious here, do you huff gas before watching baseball? Pierre and Damon are atrocious center fielders and Sammy does not by any stretch of the imagination have a cannon for an arm. Sosa has always had a very strong arm... just not much accuracy. He is like vlad to a lesser extent.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 11:49 AM) So you think the lakers have been better off without shaq? The best choice, in my opinion, would be for both players to quit their b****ing, get along, and continue to play at a high level. Shaq can still be dominant. They would still have been contenders. And I don't buy into the money argument. We're paying tim thomas a s***-load for nothing. I think the knicks still pay penny and houston some sort of ridiculous amount too. We might still be paying eddie robinson for all I know. Since coming back, shaq has been showing that he can still play. He can't completely dominate a whole game anymore, but very few can, and he still can be a force. But I'm glad things happened as they did. I dislike the lakers. Good for them. I believe that is what i said. Shaq's defense is nothing anymore... he always has nagging injuries... he always seems to complain... he costs a ridiculous amount... he is getting up there in age for a man as big as he is. Shaq can still be dominate but only for short spurts. He looks exhausted and out of shape now, what was he doing the entire time he was injured? I agree that both players shoud have just stfu and played basketball... but egos always get int he way in sports.