Paulstar

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Jul 8, 2013 -> 06:27 PM) Prior to this season Carpenter had played 5 games at 2nd base and over 300 at 3rd in the minors. You don't have to believe it, but that is their plan (at the moment). I dont know about that. Carpenter was viewed as a very good utility player and place holder for Wong at 2B coming into this year. There are three questions the Cards need to answer regarding this log jam. 1.) Freese is a fan favorite, hometown guy, and a very productive 3B. Is that really something they want to mess with on the field and in the clubhouse? 2.) Is Carpenter having a career year and should he not be expected to continue to put up the numbers he has this year? I'm a big Carpenter fan, but I bet a lot of people weren't expecting a .300 hitter with an OBP around .400. 3.) Is Wong going to be good enough to justify trading Freese/Another Vet this offseason? It is a likely possibility that Wong winds up being a nothing in the majors, and that possibility makes it tough to get rid of a sure thing like Freese (who isn't that old or expensive yet). Personally, I think during the season the Cards hang on to all of them, with Wong having the greatest odds of being moved. If they fall in love with a vet who they think will help them win another WS (me hoping that is Alexei), maybe, just maybe, they would be willing to trade Wong. In the offseason, it is definitely between Freese and Wong though. I just think they would prefer to have either a logjam or trade Wong for an impact player than to depart with Freese so soon after he has become probably the most loved player in St. Louis.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 8, 2013 -> 05:11 PM) I believe the Cards plan to let Beltran walk and let Oscar Taveras take over in the OF, making a Craig-to-OF move unworkable. Taveras is the number 3 prospect in baseball and after an injury is hitting AAA pitching well. In AA he hit 23 HR with 94 RBI over 124 games. The only wildcard is his defense in center, where he is much improved but reports are mixed as to whether he is an MLB CF'er. They could opt to take Jon Jay out of the lineup, but it's tough to say how likely that is at this point. He's having a down year but has been damn good in the past. I think the easiest thing for them to do is move Adams as he's never been that highly regarded within their organization. It is a bigger question whether they opt for Freese or Wong going forward IMO It seems to me the Cards really like Craig, and the way he keeps hitting with limited AB's is only making them like him more and more. Plus, he is left handed which doesn't hurt. What I see as more likely is Craig in RF, Taveras in CF (at least for a year or two until he outgrows it), Jay as 4th OF, Adams at 1B, and Wong being kind of the odd man out like Adams is but getting playing time to see if he can be a productive player. Than, in 2015, they will have a good idea of who they want where and will make their moves accordingly. The Cards are good enough right now where they can be patient with this whole process and develop these young studs they got.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 8, 2013 -> 04:41 PM) Holding onto Alexei much longer is equally risky. I'm not holding my breath about Ramirez being a totally different player again after redesigning spring training for the Sox again...although, in fairness, not resting him until this last has to be at least one of the top 2-3 factors in his defense performance. And he has improved his stolen base numbers/aggressiveness. I hate this argument so much. It is the epitome of an excuse. He's a professional athlete playing baseball, and it isn't like this summer has been extraordinarily hot or anything. This summer has been extremely mild so far and there has been extra off days due to rain outs (which will start to be made up soon so it will get a little tougher), plus the heat should never be that big of deal for him considering he is Cuban. You want to give your guys a day off here and there? Sure. But to blame many of his lazy and bone headed errors on the field this year partially on not having any rest is just a cop out. There have been plenty of players before Ramirez who have been able to play everyday and still be there mentally for each innin. The only reasonable explanation for his defense this year has been a lack of focus/lazy and perhaps also a lack of accountability behind the scenes.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jul 7, 2013 -> 11:38 PM) I agree. Morrison would have to go to 1B though. He has not hit very well in his career as an OF. I think that is a pretty far-fetched comment. His first season in the majors he only played LF, and that has been his best season in the majors (granted it was only 200+ ABs). I think his success at first and than struggles the next two years had more to do with the natural process of a hitter coming up and than having to adjust second time around the league when pitchers figure him out, a process that numerous hitters have gone through, and not because of the position he was playing. But it is a moot point argument, because he is best suited for firstbase because that is where he plays his best defense.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jul 7, 2013 -> 11:32 PM) IIRC, according to you wouldn't Dunn's arrival cause the Orioles to go into a tailspin and not make the postseason? Because Dunn is a loser and he makes teams worse..... Sure, if you struggle with reading comprehension. Otherwise, I did call Dunn a loser to build a team around, but never said anything to the degree you put it as. But this is a discussion for another thread, I don't want to hijack this thread again.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 7, 2013 -> 10:07 PM) I kind of question Rios in TWTW department. I have no proof, of course. The eye test tells me he's a decent ballplayer whose TWTW can be questioned. If I'm wrong, behead me. I think he screams mediocre to good ballplayer, kind of like Jose Guillen near the end of Jose's career. I'm not gonna go all Hawk like you just did, but I view Rios and Dunn in very similar ways. They both have skills sets that create lots of money for them, but I don't think they are players you want to build a team around. Instead, I view them more as very good supporting players for teams that can afford 10+ million on a player who won't necessarily be one of the cornerstones of an offense. That is why I view them as bad fits for the Sox, but good fits for the Rangers (Rios) and Orioles (Dunn). Neither will bat 3 or 4 or maybe even 5, and neither will have the entire spotlight on them. What they do good will still be better than who they are replacing, regardless of "TWTW." On a side note, that Orioles lineup would be pretty tough with Dunn in it and probably bat sixth on most nights.

If Wilkins plays well for the next two months and there are open spots on the 40 man, I don't know why you wouldn't expect to see Wilkins get a september call up. I highly doubt he ever does anything of significance at the MLB level, but when you're a team looking at a 60 loss season, the odds of someone like Wilkins getting a call up increase dramatically, especially for a team searching for power anywhere available.

I'm not arguing that hanging on to Rios is a good idea. I'm arguing that trading him for essentially Josh Fields' left handed brother is a terrible idea. If the best offer you get for Rios and his contract is Travis Snider, you might as well just hold onto to Rios and hope that either in the offseason or next deadline you get something a little more valuable.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 7, 2013 -> 04:27 PM) Wasn't Nick Swisher enough? Rios for Travis Snider would be preferable. Doubt we can get Tabata, because they waited on Alvarez so long to develop and it finally paid off...so they might want to hold onto him. Just realized a couple of things. Morrison has a 992 OPS, albeit in only 70 AB's. He's only 25, feels like he is older. Finally, he went to the same JC as Albert Pujols, Maple Woods in Kansas City. How did the Royals let both of those guys get out of their own backyard? How does Rios for Snider make any sense for the Sox?... Unless of course you are considering Snider to be a throw in to any such deal, and not the centerpiece.

I don't see how you can't think this trade is a win for the cubs. They got two good arms for Scott Feldman. The Cubs won't be missing Feldman at all 3 years from now, but the Orioles might be missing Arrieta in 3 years as he still has the potential to become a nasty starting pitcher (his stuff has never been the problem, it has been throwing strikes and learning how to pitch that has caused his lack of success). I don't blame the Orioles for trading Arrieta at all though, it was one of the situations where a change of scenery was definitely needed. Jake Arrieta could be to the Cubs what Chris Davis has been to the Orioles, a reclamation project turned to all-star.

I just hope that after Beckham hits a homer, he doesn't all of a sudden change his approach and start thinking he's a power hitter again.

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 04:43 PM) I think Robin will finish the year out but the Sox will likely move in another direction next year. The guy I want as our next manager is Dave Martinez. He has been the bench coach and right hand man to Joe Madden for the past 7 seasons. During that time the Rays have made it to the playoffs three times. Last year they won 90 games and just missed the playoffs. I would love Dave Martinez just for the glimmer of hope that Ryne Sandburg would eventually become the Cubs manager. That would really spice up the crosstown classic. As far as Hahn goes, I really do wonder how much authority he actually has. I'll be happy when Kenny Williams finally decides to depart from the White Sox.

Balta, how many times have I said teams were solely terrible because Adam Dunn was on the roster? I have not once made that argument. You would be a fool to ignore the major pitching issues on the Reds or the influx of elite talent the Nationals had coming up after Dunn left. My argument is simply this, I don't think it's purely coincidental that teams seem to get better shortly after Dunn leaves. What percentage of that is on Dunn? I dont know. But I tend to think that with his deficiencies as a player, the amount of money you have to spend on him, the questions for how much he exactly likes to play baseball; that it isn't completely out of the question that by subtracting Dunn from the equation, teams won't necessarily be sad that he's gone. I'm sorry if I misrepresented my argument, but I do not believe that he has ever been the sole reason for a team's failure, and I do not believe I ever said that. But I also believe if there is smoke, there is at least a little bit of fire.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 02:35 PM) Just so it's pointed out, since Dunn is a career .238 hitter, the difference between Dunn and Thome in terms of their "hit tool" is an average of 18 hits per year. 18 hits per year is not why one of them is a solid player and one of them is a hall of famer. I'd agree with that to an extent, but I think you are undervaluing just how crucial 18 hits can be throughout a season. Baseball is a game where one more hit can make all the difference in the world.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 02:15 PM) The Reds had nothing around him. That's like saying the Royals built their team around Gil Meche and so it's his fault they didn't make the playoffs. Sure he was their highest paid player, but Barry Bonds wasn't making those teams into playoff teams. I dont see how you can compare the early-mid 2000 Royals with the Reds. The Reds spent a whole lot more money and actually had players on their team that the average fan had heard of. But I do see your point, and the Reds did have Joey Votto coming up which also forced Dunn out. I guess its one of those situations where there is no right or wrong answer, just me in the minority vs. the majority who disagree on here. However, I am a bit worried at how much posters on this board seem to be extremely pro-sabrmetrics. I got nothing against people who use advanced stats and see value in some of them, but I have a feeling I will be in the minority in a lot of discussions when it comes to evaluating players.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 01:55 PM) "You see this fist? This fist is for you if you don't take that back". Thats an unfair comparison if you ask me. Jim Thome, at least early on and in his prime, had two legit tools, hit and power. He is a career .276 hitter which is pretty damn impressive when you consider you could could pencil in him striking out in 1/3 of his AB's. I guarantee you if Dunn was a career .276 hitter with the ability to hit over .300, he would be making more money and be on a different team than the White Sox. None-the-less, good comeback with Big Jim. Some people blame the 2006 White Sox not being as good as 2005 on him (and some other reasons as well), and for some of the same reasons I'm ripping on Dunn, and I guess I will look like I'm contradicting myself here, but Thome did nothing but help that 2006 team. Boy, it would be nice to get that offense back with Dye, Konerko, Thome, and Crede all having fantastic years. If only that team had a CF.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 01:54 PM) OK, well that tells more, and I can see where some of that comes from. But if the Rangers suddenly acquired him, I doubt they'd suddenly go in the tank and miss the playoffs. because he is Adam Dunn. And I completely agree with you. It would be lunacy to think otherwise, as it would be quite tough for one player to completely destroy a whole team. However, I felt like the Reds built their team around Dunn (was their highest paid player his final couple years there, I believe), and getting rid of Dunn and them becoming better wasn't completely coincidental. Unfortunately, you can tell I have too much Hawk in me and I agree with him that winning is a whole lot more than stats (although I don't go as far as he did with TWTW stuff, he made himself out to look like a complete idiot when he was saying that stuff on mlbn) and have to do with the culture of a team and their clubhouse.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 01:34 PM) There are so many people that spend their whole youth being told that striking out and pulling the ball is bad that I think it is impossible for some fans to ever like Adam Dunn. If pulling the ball was bad, baseball would be almost as boring as soccer. However, I will never see the value in spending big money on any player who strikes out 1/3 (with probably over a quarter of those K's being of the backwards variety) of the time and only has one legit tool.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 01:04 PM) What exactly did Dunn do in the clubhouse that made the Reds lose so many games? Now I'm interested. I've never heard people say Dunn is a clubhouse cancer. Please provide some details. Lazy, only cared about home runs, lacked clutch hitting, etc. This is all stuff said by Marty Brennaman, some beat writers, and some casual fans. If I recall correctly, there was a poster who came on here right after the Dunn signing who was a life long Reds fan and started a thread stating how getting rid of Adam Dunn was the first step in turning around the Reds and that the White Sox would rue the day they signed Dunn (I don't remember the details but I believe it was somewhere along those lines). I'm sure you can find stuff on the other side of spectrum as well, but this whole perception of Dunn being a loser was not just started by me out of the blue, this has been an issue surrounding Dunn for several years now. I still find it humorous how JP Ricciardi just completely lost it back in 2008 and went on a rant about Adam Dunn and why Blue Jay fans should not want him. Obviously, JP Ricciardi had his own issues as GM of the Blue Jays, but when a major league GM would go out and rant about a player who had no affiliation to his team like he did, it shows that there are front office people and scouts out there who see Dunn as a losing ball player. And there is nothing out there about him being a bad person. From all accounts he is a great guy. I'm talking strictly baseball wise and the way he plays the game

I think Arrietta is a great return. He has great stuff when he is on, and if he finds that right connection with the right pitching coach, he can possibly live up to that hype of being an ace.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 12:28 PM) Dunn was with the Reds from 2001-2008. Over this time period, they averaged scoring 4.58 runs/game, while giving up 5.212 runs/game, and won around 73.5 games per year. After he left from 2009-2012, the scoring went down to 4.424 runs/game, while they gave up much less at a clip of 4.191 runs/game. Their average season went up to 86.25 wins and they made the playoffs twice. Recap: Dunn leaves, their offense gets slightly worse, but suddenly they give up a run less per game and become a good team. Most people think that it's because they suddenly got a better pitching staff. However, your explanation is that Adam Dunn is a loser. Gotcha. Hahahahaha, I never said that pitching didn't drastically benefit the Reds. You would be a nut to think that pitching didn't help the Reds turn around, but nice job putting words in my mouth though, very nice. In my opinion, when you add everything up about Dunn, it's not that crazy to think that some teams are better without Dunn. And I know for a fact there are several Reds fans out there who believe for a fact that part of the reason why the Reds turned around from being a bottom dweller to a contender had to do with getting Dunn out of the clubhouse. So if you want to sit there and calculate different numbers, and put words in my mouth, go ahead. You have your opinion and I have mine. I'm glad I am not as obstinate as you and just view anyone with a minority opinion as an idiot as you clearly have tried to make me out to be.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 04:15 AM) The bolded line above seems like a contradiction to me. Are you suggesting that he would have better plate discipline if he was more willing to swing at pitches that are harder to hit? And what does this have to do with him being a losing ballplayer who makes his team worse around him? There's nothing wrong with you questioning whether or not his skill set is a good fit for this team, but that's not what you said said before. I'm not saying that at all. In some situations you are supposed to sit dead red. Other situations call for you sacrificing power and just meeting the ball to help the team. However, it seems like Dunn sits dead red looking for a pitch to hit for a homer a lot more than the average player does, and if he truly had great plate discipline, he would not strikeout looking probably around 50 times a year and strike out twice for every walk he draws. I think it would be awesome if Dunn was fined a hundred bucks for every home run he hit and every time he struck out looking. Dunn is big and strong enough where if he just looks to meet the ball a lot more than he does now, and focus hitting the ball the left side (where it is the biggest hole on the field for him to hit the ball to), his average would greatly benefit and he would probably wind up hitting just as many, if not more home runs than he does now.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 08:00 AM) His numbers with the Diamondbacks included an .889 OPS. He hit homers, got on base, and increased the team's productivity in general. It's not his fault they went 22-22. Regarding last year, there were talks of him being hurt during the entire second half. Anyways, this is the last I'm talking about this, I obviously completely disagree with you and really, I think you're fighting your own battle here. I don't know how you can say if it was or wasn't his fault. Did you watch all 44 of those games? All I said is that I would love to hear what some people who actually got to watch that team every day think about Dunn. Stats can be decieving, and I think foolish to base opinions solely on stats. I just think that acquiring a so called top bat like his, you would think he would help an already over .500 ballclub play better than .500 ball in a tight playoff race.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 08:14 AM) What drives me nuts is that in this very thread a few posts before you repeated your opinion that Adam Dunn started performing vastly worse in the clutch, in high-leverage, game on the line situations...it was pointed out using actual numbers that your opinion didn't match reality. But, you not only repeated your opinion, you completely ignored where it was responded to with actual numbers and pretended it didn't exist. I honestly did not see that post. But you can also look at his career stats with two outs in an inning, runners in scoring position with two outs, bases loaded with two outs, his decline in stats once the game enter the 7th-8th-9th (but is extremely good in extra innings), etc. With all these stats available, you can take a hand full of stats and make them show one thing, but then take another and they would show something else. And I am not a fan of the BR leverage stat. There are so many variations and different situations in baseball where sure, one situation based on runners on and how many outs might seem like high leverage, but there are so many different circumstances than can affect the degree of pressure. Stats are great and all, but when you actually get to watch a player every day for a couple years, I think you can throw the stats out the window. You are gonna learn much more about a player from watching them vs. live pitching than stats will ever tell you. And from what I have seen from Dunn, as well as read and heard from others who got to watch him every day in Cincinnati, the man is always around losing teams. I never said he is the sole driving force for these said teams being losers, but I think its a little more than coincidental. If you want to cast it simply as just bad luck, be my guest. I'm not going to try and make you out to be a village idiot, but don't try and make me out to be one either because you disagree with me.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jul 1, 2013 -> 07:43 PM) What piece of information do you have that leads you to believe that's the case? Because in the absence of evidence to the contrary, I tend to believe that people will act in their best interests -- so I would assume Dunn would want to do the thing that would make him successful. You don't walk over 100 times and strikeout 1/3 of the time by having great discipline. You do it exactly like Dunn does and being extremely selective. Obviously to walk as much as he does requires a level of plate discipline, but from what I have seen (I don't believe you need stats to backup everything you think if you have actually had a chance to see the player everyday for the past 2 1/2 years) he sits dead red for a pitch to hit out of the park, and if recognize early that it is not his pitch, he lets it go. The walks come by him being such a threat to hit a home run that pitchers are careful to avoid leaving anything out over the plate that he can hit out of the park. And him focusing on home runs and walking has certainly been in his best interest because it has made him a lot of money. The question though is if his style of play in the best interest of the team? I'd say possibly if he wasn't relied on to be the top hitter of the team.