Protection is vastly overated in my opinion.

 

Yet it's the difference between PK being a great offensive player and a mediocre 1 dimensional offensive player. Main ingredient of PK's success has been protection.

Fine...I won't start finger-pointing either, but something has made his production plummet like a rock tumbling off a cliff for the early part of this year.  Just because I won't point fingers doesn't mean I immediately want to give up our #1 and #2 prospects to get the guy.

 

That lineup just got Nick Swisher and Bobby Crosby back from the DL, so it has taken a step up.  Jason Kendall has been down this year as well.  If his problem is protection...that will fix itself pretty quick, and he should have a solid June.

 

If his problem is something else, and he has another month hitting .230 (or .170 like he did in April), then you really have to start asking questions.  Especially if your team is thinking of making a trade for him.

 

Ahhh, how we all love the game of Risk......

At this time any player with a huge dropoff in production is going to be suspected of Steroids. I think the fingerpointing shouldnt start until the season is over and the sample is more than 2 months.

 

Right. Just by looking at declining stats, you could finger many players as having gotten off the juice and suffering the resuls. Did Dye just get off the juice? What about PK? For every obvious Giambi out there, there are a number of more dubious cases.

 

I haven't watched Chavez enough over the last four or five years to know what his body looked like then vs. what it looks like now. Did he hit a lot of garbage, "steroids-y" homers prior to this year? Is that why his numbers are down?

 

Whenever you note an effect (i.e. a drop in stats), it is important to assess the causes. Is it bad luck? Is it diminished skills (the skills being physical [strength, running speed, bat speed] or mental [plate approach, focus in the field, reflexes, seeing the ball well] and the diminishing can be natural [is the player injured or past his prime or was his good year(s) an anomaly] or unnatural [he got off of something performance enhancing])? Is it a new, unfavorable environment [different team. different home park, different coaches, different players around him]t? Is it a combination?

 

These are questions that you should ask yourself about Chavez before you blindly think he was on steroids (or his numbers won't return to career form) due to diminished numbers (I don't know the answers, either) and assess whether he would have value on our roster:

 

1) Does he appear physically diminished from prior seasons (a la Giambi's trimming down)?

2) Did his past levels of high offensive production stem from hits that a player on steroids would benefit from?

3) If he joins the White Sox, would this new environment prevent him from becoming a player similarly productive to his past self.

These are questions that you should ask yourself about Chavez before you blindly think he was on steroids (or his numbers won't return to career form) due to diminished numbers (I don't know the answers, either) and assess whether he would have value on our roster:

 

1) Does he appear physically diminished from prior seasons (a la Giambi's trimming down)?

2) Did his past levels of high offensive production stem from hits that a player on steroids would benefit from?

3) If he joins the White Sox, would this new environment prevent him from becoming a player similarly productive to his past self.

 

4. Are you confident enough that his past production will return to give up your top level prospects and take on a bloated contract?

4.  Are you confident enough that his past production will return to give up your top level prospects and take on a bloated contract?

 

Or restated: home much financial risk must be assumed by the trading partner before top level prospects can be considered in such a deal?

 

If Oakland pays 70% of that deal, then I'm more likely to give them McCarthy. If they only accept 30%, then might get Honel out of me.

Or restated: home much financial risk must be assumed by the trading partner before top level prospects can be considered in such a deal?

 

If Oakland pays 70% of that deal, then I'm more likely to give them McCarthy.  If they only accept 30%, then might get Honel out of me.

 

70%?! There's no way that come anywhere near that.

70%?!  There's no way that come anywhere near that.

 

Well, then maybe 50% for the remainder of 2005. I dunno how these things work exactly, but you'd need to figure out a threshold that you'd be happy to give away McCarthy at. If he's off limits, then that's what it is.

sox-r-us, what kind of deal do you think we'd need to make to get Castilla here?

 

Crede + 1 decent prospect (none of the names thrown around for Chavez mind you)

 

The Nats would love to have someone like Crede considering he is still young + a prospect for a 37 year old player who will probably not play after next year

The guy from Baseball Prospectus today was talking about Castilla on ESPN news and basically said that he is hitting .245 the past month with one homer and that is just about the kind of Castilla to expect rather than the one you saw in April.

 

Please, enough with the Vinny Castilla bulls***, no one wants him!

How do you know that May is a slump. Maybe he was playing over his head in April and the May numbers are the real Vinny Castila at 37.

 

How about we wait until the trade deadline? Would that give you enough stats to make an informed decision with?

 

Considering he plays on a team awful on O, wouldn't he be better hitting here if Frank comes back strong? I know the same argument applies for Chavez (playing on a team awful on O), and I agree with that. My problem with Chavez is simply that his performance/$ is way too low a ratio, especially for a team like ours which spends very carefully.

Crede + 1 decent prospect (none of the names thrown around for Chavez mind you)

 

The Nats would love to have someone like Crede considering he is still young + a prospect for a 37 year old player who will probably not play after next year

 

They would jump at just crede.

I think Chavez and Castilla will both be too expensive in terms of the prospects required to acquire them.  We're better served pursuing Polanco or Mackowiak, I think.

 

Doesn't Mackowiak play LF????

Doesn't Mackowiak play LF???? 

 

and RF and 2B and 3B.

Remember, Chavez doesn't have any type of protection in his lineup. That's a big reason why his numbers are down.

 

Neither does Castilla, so what is your point?

and RF and 2B and 3B.

 

Ok, but Macowiak has hit 0.244, 0.270 and 0.246 the last 3 years with 16,6, and 17 HRs

 

So his #s over the years are no better than Vinny's. Maybe he too is playing over his head?

The guy from Baseball Prospectus today was talking about Castilla on ESPN news and basically said that he is hitting .245 the past month with one homer and that is just about the kind of Castilla to expect rather than the one you saw in April.

 

Please, enough with the Vinny Castilla bulls***, no one wants him!

 

Of course this guy must be the be-all-know-all of baseball :rolly

 

Correct Mr-Frank-Thomas-Sucks? :headshake

How about we wait until the trade deadline? Would that give you enough stats to make an informed decision with?

 

Considering he plays on a team awful on O, wouldn't he be better hitting here if Frank comes back strong? I know the same argument applies for Chavez (playing on a team awful on O), and I agree with that. My problem with Chavez is simply that his performance/$ is way too low a ratio, especially for a team like ours which spends very carefully.

Joe Randa >>> Vinny Castilla.

On all this Chavez talk, if there is any way we can get him without giving up B-Mac, Anderson, Sweeney or Gio Gonzalez, then I'm inclined to do it. Fields can move across to first base if we keep him, and him and Rogo will have a nice battle to see who makes it at that position at that position in the next few years. Sean Tracey, I think will probably be included in any deal. Of course, if Oakland pays some of Chavez's contract, that only sweetens the deal.

Of course this guy must be the be-all-know-all of baseball  :rolly

 

Correct Mr-Frank-Thomas-Sucks?  :headshake

 

ABoz never said Frank Thomas sucks. Don't put words in people's mouths.

 

 

And Wedge, great posts on page 17. Some of you are really getting silly with the whole "he was probably on the juice and now that he's off of it he sucks". It's getting stupid, really. It's 200-or-so f***ing at-bats and you guys are labeling him a steroid user? You know what? JD Drew is hitting .251 so far, was he on steroids too? Same with Konerko? Sheesh, give it a f***ing rest already...

Nobody is comparing Chavez directly to Vinny. Can you read for crying out loud? I have always said I would rather have Vinny + another stud than Chavez. It is all about value (defined as performance/$). Do you even get that?

 

Actually you did in this post.

 

Castilla in 2005:

 

49 G, 173 AB, 21 R, 50 H, 3 SB, 4 HR, 25 RBI, 0.289 AVG, 0.363 OBP, 0.451 SLG%

 

Chavez in 2005:

 

51 G, 202 AB, 19 R, 44 H, 0 SB, 4 HR, 23 RBI, 0.218 AVG, 0.276 OBP, 0.317 SLG%

 

Cruddy in 2005:

 

50 G, 163 AB, 20 R, 37 H, 0 SB, 5 HR, 18 RBI, 0.227 AVG, 0.286 OBP, 0.368 SLG%

 

For all the talk regarding Chavez's speed, he has 0 SB compared to 3 for Vinny

Actually you did in this post.

Of course a lot of people do forget that Chavez is notorious for being a slow starter.

Joe Randa >>> Vinny Castilla.

 

I don't much care for Randa, but I would agree with that. I would much rather see the Sox make a deal for Randa vs Castilla.

I don't much care for Randa, but I would agree with that.  I would much rather see the Sox make a deal for Randa vs Castilla.

And Cincinatti will actually be more inclined to do a deal since they have a top prospect in Edwin Encarnacion waiting in the wings.

"I signed this deal knowing i will be on a contending team, and once the A's become a non-contending team I expects to be dealt to a contender."

 

Cmon, that doesn't sound like he wants to get out of there at all?

 

He signed the contract thinking the A's would contend each year. Was that something he shouldn't have thought? Now that Beane is in a rebuilding mode, Eric knows his A's career could very well be coming to an end. Why's that a bad thing?

Chavez would be nice, but am I the only one that doesn't want to give up BMAC? For that fact, I don't want to part with Anderson, Sweeney, or Gio either.