jackie hayes

Good point, I wasn't thinking about that.

Borchard ends the inning w/ a k. When he grounds out, it's exciting b/c it's so rare. Burke hitting at the bottom of the middle of the order. Would you think about putting him towards the top of the lineup? Not usually a catcher's spot, but Burke doesn't have much power, has a good obp, and doesn't strike out much. Really a bad fit?

2 ks to end the top of the 1st, keep it up Freddy

Error on Borchard. C'mon Sox, my first game thread, don't make me feel guilty!

Lineups: KC DeJesus Berroa Randa Stairs Nunez Pickering Relaford Buck Murphy p: Gobble Good Guys Rowand Uribe Lee Konerko Gload Burke Borchard Crede Valdez p: Garcia Go Sox!!!

Although JimH is usually level in his posts, I don't think this one was fair. It was proof by stereotype: "a lot of you", "many of you", "some of you". Not me, not me, not me, I say to those. If the first had happened, I would have just laughed at Bill Bavasi for making another bad move, b/c even w/o Reed (say, w/ Crede), we could top NY's offer. As for the second, I haven't made any absolutely ludicrous trade proposals, although it's odd that we can trade Crede for something but not our "underachieving junk". As for the third, no, I'm thinking more of Reed's minor league career. Meanwhile, you are replying to OldSocks, who said the main point of your post (that switching Borchard and Reed is a pipedream) a long time ago. Lots of people complained about the trade then and have disliked it ever since then. Of course we can disagree, but don't pull this "I'm going to tell you other people what you think" crap. I know what I think, and you don't have it right.

But the question should always be, How big of a risk? How many AA stars become aces (not just decent ML pitchers, dominant ML pitchers)? This sounds like a move for a rebuilding team, and I don't think the Sox should take that course.

Or might never become an ace. That's the biggest downside.

It's a hoax, which is too bad. Still awfully funny, and one heck of a mock-up. Fortran was only a baby in 1954, the first version wasn't finished until 1957.

Yeah, but the reports were that Cashman didn't even bother to put together a counter-offer at that point. It may have been close before Reed, but putting him in the deal made the gap huge. The Sox already had an advantage in Olivo v Navarro. And I think you may be overestimating Crede's trade value now. He's had two full seasons and hasn't come around. He's even looking worse lately. Even interested teams know it's a big risk.

"Oh yeah, you blend." Especiallly w/ so much money involved, he'll get a lot of attention anywhere. Even in our quiet little hamlet on a lake.

That was my understanding. I'm just pointing out that they would have done the deal w/o Reed, and they would have done the deal w/o getting a contact hitter. It wasn't as bad as the Ritchie deal, but it was pretty bad. There are few 3b in the league, if any, who've been as bad as Crede this season. The Sox could have picked someone up, or let Uribe handle it, and we would have been better off. Reed had shown the ability to do all the things we need most on offense, obp and fewer strikeouts. Not to mention, I think there was a lot of space between our offer and NY's. We gave up too much in this deal. But I'm not saying Seattle would have accepted Borchard. Although I can't imagine what flaws they could find in his game...

How do you know that? Has he said something in the papers hinting at this?

I thought initially Seattle asked for Crede and Olivo, but KW wouldn't give up 2 ML starters. So he proposed Reed or Borchard, instead. You're telling me that all those stories were hooey, that Seattle was demanding Reed all along?

Crede is a contact hitter?

Why should we want this to happen? That'll likely be 1/6-1/5 of the total payroll, and it'll be a multiyear (minimum 5 yr) deal, so it ties our hands for years to come. Beltran is good, but he's definitely not as good as either Guerrero or Pujols, each of whom makes $14-15 mil. If he gets as much as that, walk away.

Tell me if this is too heretical: At that point, MJ was just so dominant that I actually enjoyed the Pippen season more than the season before. You didn't really know if they could do it, it was more exciting. And they absolutely should have won. I try hard to give refs/umps the benefit of the doubt, but those were bs calls.

Beltre's first 2 full seasons were much better than Crede's, so at least they knew he could do something, even when he wasn't. Crede hasn't shown that yet. On the other hand, I don't think he'll bring much in a trade, unless he's part of a package. Maybe another intriguing disappointment to match (a different sort of challenge trade), or an okay reliever, or a good AAA reliever, or a middle-of-the-road prospect. But he's shown too little, he's too risky, for someone to give up a big piece for him (unless perhaps that piece carries a big price tag, too).

Check the splits on mlb.com, Jose's done pretty well w/ a runner on third and one out. He hasn't used sac flies often, but he's got the job done. He does strike out too much, w/ runners on or w/ the bases empty, but there's no news there. But he hits for power so much better than Timo, how can you say walks are the "only thing" Jose does better? I'm still not convinced that the Sox have been so inconsistent when it comes to scoring runs.

I voted yes, I'm a big fan of using more statistics. But of course I'm sceptical about some standard sabermetric stats. I also would demur on Valentin somewhat. I still think he's useful as a platoon slugger -- his ops against righties is okay -- it's too bad he hasn't been used that way. Slugging pct is still an important stat, even if it's less important than obp.

Well, Baldwin at least did something. About half the time he pulled his weight.

I looked back at some old threads about Jose, and they are mostly vitriol. How can you say he was overrated when he wasn't rated highly?

Sounds fine, but then I know nothing about sabermetrics. But I'm curious, why is there so much emphasis on getting it down to one number? Why avoid multiple regression?

poorme is right. A coin flip would have a correlation of 0, not 1/2. A correlation of 1/2 means that one variable "explains" 1/2 of the total variation in another each time.

That's asking too much for Crede. Julio's a proven MLer on a pitching staff that was very bad this year. Cruz is an amazing, inconsistent talent, who has pitched very well this year. Crede is a disappointment. The best you can hope for is another intriguing disappointment in return.