Erstad looks better in the field

 

What has Anderson does wrong in the field? Isn't it now two consecutive days where Erstad has made mistakes in the field?

Edited April 16, 200719 yr by CWSGuy406

What the f*** has Anderson done? Erstad looks better in the field, has an actual approach at the plate, and is able to do the small things. BA isnt up to snuff in any of those categories right now.

 

4 games and 7 at-bats in 2 weeks will do that to a guy. Why do you think Mackowiak and Cintron look like s*** right now?

 

Anderson was never given a chance, and that's the problem.

4 games and 7 at-bats in 2 weeks will do that to a guy. Why do you think Mackowiak and Cintron look like s*** right now?

 

Anderson was never given a chance, and that's the problem.

Exactly, so what of his history with the team makes you think he is head and shoulders better than Erstad? BA should be in AAA, and thats that.

 

Frankly I think the 3-3 record on this road trip with this offense is stellar, but if we must nitpick, we must.

What the f*** has Anderson done? Erstad looks better in the field, has an actual approach at the plate, and is able to do the small things. BA isnt up to snuff in any of those categories right now.

 

Thank you, that is exactly how I feel. Anderson showed that what, he can hit at best .250 for half a year? I'm not trying to say that he wont be a good player, but he needs to prove it. Yes, he should be in the minors to do that, but he does not deserve to be out on the field unless he is subbing defensively for Pods.

Thank you, that is exactly how I feel. Anderson showed that what, he can hit at best .250 for half a year? I'm not trying to say that he wont be a good player, but he needs to prove it. Yes, he should be in the minors to do that, but he does not deserve to be out on the field unless he is subbing defensively for Pods.

He needs to be in AAA. And Terrero needs to be the 4th OF'er.

Thank you, that is exactly how I feel. Anderson showed that what, he can hit at best .250 for half a year? I'm not trying to say that he wont be a good player, but he needs to prove it. Yes, he should be in the minors to do that, but he does not deserve to be out on the field unless he is subbing defensively for Pods.

 

alert the presses, a rookie struggled at the plate and improved over the year.

 

How the f*** can he prove it if he's never given playing time?

Truth be told, Anderson was never a blue chip prospect. He's 25 and has been awful at the plate in 400 career AB's. He'd be worth starting in CF if the Sox rebuilding in the hopes that he'd turn into a useful player by the time he's 27.

alert the presses, a rookie struggled at the plate and improved over the year.

 

How the f*** can he prove it if he's never given playing time?

 

I agree with RockRaines here, he needs to go to AAA.

 

There he can prove himself as a hitter again and then contribute to the Sox.

Truth be told, Anderson was never a blue chip prospect. He's 25 and has been awful at the plate in 400 career AB's. He'd be worth starting in CF if the Sox rebuilding in the hopes that he'd turn into a useful player by the time he's 27.

 

Surely 400 ABs is enough to decide the fate of ANY ballplayer in the majors, too.

Truth be told, Anderson was never a blue chip prospect. He's 25 and has been awful at the plate in 400 career AB's. He'd be worth starting in CF if the Sox rebuilding in the hopes that he'd turn into a useful player by the time he's 27.

 

He was a top 100 prospect at one point.

 

I agree with RockRaines here, he needs to go to AAA.

 

There he can prove himself as a hitter again and then contribute to the Sox.

 

 

Getting consistent AB's in AAA is better than wasting away on the bench, but he needs to play and prove himself against major league pitching.

He was a top 100 prospect at one point.

 

Oh if I had the time to name every player that was once a top 100 prospect and didnt amount to jack-squat.

Oh if I had the time to name every player that was once a top 100 prospect and didnt amount to jack-squat.

 

Doesn't matter. Top 100 is "blue chip," is it not?

Exactly, so what of his history with the team makes you think he is head and shoulders better than Erstad? BA should be in AAA, and thats that.

 

Frankly I think the 3-3 record on this road trip with this offense is stellar, but if we must nitpick, we must.

 

He's got better power, he's a better defender and pure athlete, and he's faster. He won't make contact at the same rate, but contact only does so much if you're grounding to the 2Bman every time.

 

He also hit well, but not amazingly, in AAA and was never given consistent playing time after having made the adjustment from AAA to MLB pitching. He's said he's got a much better attitude this year, that he'll work harder, and that he screwed up a lot last year.

 

I have to agree that he's better served in AAA if he's going to get 7 ABs every 2 weeks, that's flat out ridiculous.

Edited April 16, 200719 yr by witesoxfan

Doesn't matter. Top 100 is "blue chip," is it not?

 

Not even close. Top 10-15 is what I'd consider blue chip.

What has Anderson does wrong in the field? Isn't it now two consecutive days where Erstad has made mistakes in the field?

I've been so disappointed in Erstad's defense this year, he's looked good a majority of the time in CF with his reads but he's made too many damn mental mistakes for a guy who is supposed to be the ultimate cerebral player. That along with his lack of closing speed and I'd say he's been less than stellar.

Not even close. Top 10-15 is what I'd consider blue chip.

 

Here is Baseball America's Top 15 prospects for 2006

1. Delmon Young, of, Devil Rays

2. Justin Upton, ss, Diamondbacks

3. Brandon Wood, ss, Angels

4. Jeremy Hermida, of, Marlins

5. Stephen Drew, ss, Diamondbacks

6. Francisco Liriano, lhp, Twins

7. Chad Billingsley, rhp, Dodgers

8. Justin Verlander, rhp, Tigers

9. Lastings Milledge, of, Mets

10. Matt Cain, rhp, Giants

11. Prince Fielder, 1b, Brewers

12. Howie Kendrick, 2b, Angels

13. Alex Gordon, 3b, Royals

14. Andy Marte, 3b, Indians

15. Ryan Zimmerman, 3b, Nationals

 

Brian Anderson was ranked #51, Jenks #24, anywho These top 15 are considered franchise players, ones that you can build a rotation or lineup around. I dont think AAAnderson was considered that, but was considered as a good player who had a chance to be great but would hit .280 with 20 hrs. That doesnt seem to be blue chip to me.

Edited April 16, 200719 yr by bigruss22

Just for the record, Anderson was #37 in '05. Right there with guys like Scott Olsen #38, Conor Jackson #40, Ryan Sweeney #42 and Brian McCann #44.

 

Who gives a s*** if he was a 'blue chip' prospect anyway? It's going to be fun as hell this offseason when KW has to decide who will be in his future outfield because he has nothing going for him right now in the way of young OF.

he real problem is that neither Erstad or Anderson is an acceptable answer in center.

I am thinking you are right.

Even though Anderson has yet to hit, I would prefer playing him over Erstad.

I don't know why KW went the Erstad route this offseason.

The only hope is that like somebody on here said, offense is down all over the league.

Soriano has yet to get a big hit for the Cub.

 

Let's just assume it's the weather.

 

Oh yes and Iguchi must be moved to the No. 2 hole ASAP or trade him.

His is disgracefully bad deep down in the order.

Who gives a s*** if he was a 'blue chip' prospect anyway? It's going to be fun as hell this offseason when KW has to decide who will be in his future outfield because he has nothing going for him right now in the way of young OF.

I'm sorry, but to my eyes, this is just wrong. OF is still one of our strengths in our minor leagues, especially if we start counting Fields as a LF. The organization just seems to refuse to acknowledge this and give it a shot.

I'd say a much bigger problem is that too many people are assuming that Brian Anderson will never improve beyond what he did last season.

 

Odds are he doesn't. And that's not a slam on him, it's just that very few ballplayers end up really making it in the bigs. If the Sox want to contend this season they can't wait for Anderson to come around. His plate appearances today were horrific and we now read more stories about his poor work ethic. That doesn't encourage optimism.

 

Anderson could improve. I think I like him as a prospect more than most Sox fans. But he's worse than useless on this Sox team. Terrero is a much better fit, since Ozzie is on record as saying he loves him (actually, Terrero is a lot like Anderson will probably be a couple years from now). It's clear Anderson has no future with the Sox, and can't contribute at the plate in the present. For the sake of Anderson's career and the organization it's time for the team to move him to another organization.

thanks for the worst argument ever, seriously.

 

I could start over Brian Anderson, what the f*** does that mean? jack f***ing s***.

 

You're a potty mouthed lil fella aint ya ? How could you start over Brian Anderson ? When were u added 2 the roster ?

You're a potty mouthed lil fella aint ya ? How could you start over Brian Anderson ? When were u added 2 the roster ?

 

I was kind of intoxicated, so that makes the language a little more understandable, seeing as how it's a heated topic and all.

 

Beyond that, the only case he used to defend why Erstad should be starting over Anderson is the fact that he is. Therefore, if I were added to the roster, and Ozzie put me in CF, I'd be starting over Anderson, and that'd be all the tangible evidence one would need to have me starting over Anderson, right? No, that's completely and entirely wrong, because that's blind favoritism and nothing more.

 

Anderson may be sitting because he is in Ozzie's doghouse for whatever reason, but when Ozzie comes out and says it's an open competition in ST and that the better man will win the job, and then the better man doesn't win the job, it speaks volumes for his character. I never heard an explanation as to why Anderson wasn't given the starting job that he earned, but I guess it really doesn't matter because "Darin's starting and that's all that matters."

I was kind of intoxicated, so that makes the language a little more understandable, seeing as how it's a heated topic and all.

 

Beyond that, the only case he used to defend why Erstad should be starting over Anderson is the fact that he is. Therefore, if I were added to the roster, and Ozzie put me in CF, I'd be starting over Anderson, and that'd be all the tangible evidence one would need to have me starting over Anderson, right? No, that's completely and entirely wrong, because that's blind favoritism and nothing more.

 

Anderson may be sitting because he is in Ozzie's doghouse for whatever reason, but when Ozzie comes out and says it's an open competition in ST and that the better man will win the job, and then the better man doesn't win the job, it speaks volumes for his character. I never heard an explanation as to why Anderson wasn't given the starting job that he earned, but I guess it really doesn't matter because "Darin's starting and that's all that matters."

 

Don't you just love circular logic?

I'd just like to thank Steve Stone for being a good voice of reason on the Brian Anderson situation.

I'd just like to thank Steve Stone for being a good voice of reason on the Brian Anderson situation.

?