And nowhere near the talent level, what's your point?

 

Ozzie prefers Erstad, it doesn't matter what anyone else says...I think the point made about the back-up QB always being the better option for half the fans, until the back-up QB actually plays and then the fans turn on him and they want the NEXT back-up QB was spot on.

 

Politte, Dye, Hermanson, El Duque, Takatsu, Thornton, Loiaza, Contreras, Iguchi, Everett, Pods, AJ....they all made contributions to the White Sox between age 30-35 (or older) when little was expected of them.

Edited April 25, 200718 yr by caulfield12

How many teams in baseball wanted Frank Thomas after the 2005 season? ONE. And Billy Beane was very reluctant and did lots of due diligence first.

 

How many teams wanted Darin Erstad? At least two.

 

Are you dense? I wasn't comparing them as players, I was making a point that everyone deserves the opportunity to come back from an injury....and that Erstad was a lot younger than Thomas.

 

Eliminate 16 teams because all 30 knew he couldn't play 1B. Add to it that Thomas's value was never going to be as a reserve, while Erstad would have had that, and more interested in Erstad starts to make a whole hell of a lot more sense.

Eliminate 16 teams because all 30 knew he couldn't play 1B. Add to it that Thomas's value was never going to be as a reserve, while Erstad would have had that, and more interested in Erstad starts to make a whole hell of a lot more sense.

 

 

The Marlins also wanted him to be the starter in CF.

QUOTE(caulfield12 @ Apr 24, 2007 -> 08:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Marlins also wanted him to be the starter in CF.

Just like Brian Anderson, all because of his cost.

 

Merge plz.

The Marlins also wanted him to be the starter in CF.

 

You have seen who the Marlins options for CF have been, right? Alex Sanchez, Eric Reed, and Alejandro De Aza. Now that De Aza's on the DL, Cody Ross and Alfredo Amezaga are playing CF for them. Every one of those mentioned is a worse option than both Erstad and Anderson.

erstad had another good game today

 

he's hitting at the same clip as paulie, lets fire both of em.

Stupid thread.

The difference between Paulie and Erstad is immeasurable. It's like comparing apples and some fruit no one's ever heard of.

 

I still want to DFA him, good game tonight or not. A sub .600 OPS is horrible, especially for a guy who gets so many AB.

The difference between Paulie and Erstad is immeasurable. It's like comparing apples and some fruit no one's ever heard of.

 

I still want to DFA him, good game tonight or not. A sub .600 OPS is horrible, especially for a guy who gets so many AB.

 

So we should DFA Crede too?

 

He's only at .594, despite the homer last night.

CREDE HAS A HISTORY OF SUCCESS AND DOES NOT HAVE A YOUNG GUY ROTTING ON THE BENCH WHO IS BETTER THAN HIM.

 

Caulfield, stop comparing good baseball players to Erstad. It is not the same thing. Erstad is a whole other beast just because of the situation.

CREDE HAS A HISTORY OF SUCCESS AND DOES NOT HAVE A YOUNG GUY ROTTING ON THE BENCH WHO IS BETTER THAN HIM.

 

Caulfield, stop comparing good baseball players to Erstad. It is not the same thing. Erstad is a whole other beast just because of the situation.

 

 

Yeah, Erstad is 32 and has an 11 year track record of being an above average MLB player.

 

Crede is 29 (I think) and has one and one half seasons of real success and another 3-4 years of being a top quartile defender and a third quartile hitter.

 

Is Crede better now? Yes, but don't assume anything in baseball.

 

And don't keep saying someone is bad because they're coming off a season of injuries (see Dye in April/May 2005) when they have a track record behind them and you would prefer the ballclub played someone else.

Wrong. He has a six year track record of being pretty god damn terrible at hitting. I could f***ing care less what he did during the Clinton administration.

I still want to DFA him, good game tonight or not. A sub .600 OPS is horrible, especially for a guy who gets so many AB.

 

 

C'mon. I understand that some people don't like him, but that is just ridiculous. Other than Thome EVERYONE on this team has been hitting like s*** until the past few days. The guy plays solid defense in center and has come up with some very clutch hits the past few games... DFA him...

Wrong. He has a six year track record of being pretty god damn terrible at hitting. I could f***ing care less what he did during the Clinton administration.

 

 

If .278 is "god damn terrible" from 2001 through 2006, what is Anderson?

 

Anderson tries to get started

 

April 25, 2007

BY JOE COWLEY Staff Reporter

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- While White Sox manager

 

Ozzie Guillen was the first to admit that being a bench player and getting a start once a week, at best, wasn't the easiest way to make a living in the major leagues, he also wasn't going to have any sympathy for Brian Anderson.

The seldom-used second-year player finally was in the starting lineup Tuesday night against the Kansas City Royals, and his manager wasn't about to cut him slack.

 

''That's his job,'' Guillen said. ''Everybody has a job in the big-league level. Everyone has a job in baseball, and unfortunately that's the job for him this year.

''I expect him to get good at-bats, like everybody else does. I'm trying to find a better situation for him right now, but it's still early in the season.''

 

Guillen said the biggest obstacles to getting Anderson playing time have been frequent days off, few matchups against left-handed pitchers and the stellar play of Darin Erstad in center field -- Anderson's natural position.

 

''Early in the season, it's hard to get him playing time,'' Guillen said. ''I try to put him in against righties just because I know how hard it is to go 10 days without playing and then all of a sudden try to perform.''

Batting average is absolutely useless. OPS+ of 78, 88, 75, 95, 89, and 60. That's not very good, in fact it's pretty terrible for a guy that is playing every day in MLB.

 

Is Joe Cowley insane? What has been stellar about Erstad and his .292 SLG?

CREDE HAS A HISTORY OF SUCCESS AND DOES NOT HAVE A YOUNG GUY ROTTING ON THE BENCH WHO IS BETTER THAN HIM.

Brian Anderson is not better than him. Erstad has shown he is better defensively, and is producing as a lead off man.

Brian Anderson is not better than him. Erstad has shown he is better defensively, and is producing as a lead off man.

False. Whether or not he's produced leading off is irrelevant. Whether he's hitting 1st or 2nd, he's still in front of the 3-4-5 and needs to GET ON BASE, which he hasn't been doing.

Brian Anderson is not better than him. Erstad has shown he is better defensively, and is producing as a lead off man.

 

Truth

False. Whether or not he's produced leading off is irrelevant. Whether he's hitting 1st or 2nd, he's still in front of the 3-4-5 and needs to GET ON BASE, which he hasn't been doing.

OH RLY. Do you happen to know his numbers as a lead off man?

 

And hes still better defensively.

OH RLY. Do you happen to know his numbers as a lead off man?

 

And hes still better defensively.

 

 

Yes, because a .344 OBP at leadoff deserves a trip to the waiver wire.

Yes, I know his numbers leading off. They're better than his numbers hitting second, but does it really matter whether he's hitting first or second? No. OVERALL, his OBP is .278. Whether or not that comes from the first position or the second position is irrelevant. He hasn't been as amazing as people are acting.

 

And are people really faulting BA for slipping in that pond in CF last night?

Here are players with similar or worse OPS from 2001-2006 than Darin Erstad.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/shareit/aRXn

Here are players with similar or worse OPS from 2001-2006 than Darin Erstad.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/shareit/aRXn

There's at least one hall-of-famer on that list!

Here are players with similar or worse OPS from 2001-2006 than Darin Erstad.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/shareit/aRXn

Is OPS really a great indicator of how valuable a lead off hitter is? How important is slugging PCT when your job is to just get on base and slap hits?

 

A majority of his career has been batting lead off. He has done that to a tune of a .299 avg .354 OBP and .809 OPS (for Craig). I would say thats a pretty good line.

There's at least one hall-of-famer on that list!

You must have missed Jack Wilson and Hiram Bocachica

 

Is OPS really a great indicator of how valuable a lead off hitter is? How important is slugging PCT when your job is to just get on base and slap hits?

 

A majority of his career has been batting lead off. He has done that to a tune of a .299 avg .354 OBP and .809 OPS (for Craig). I would say thats a pretty good line.

Your ability to slug is always important. It doesn't matter what position you bat in the order, the objective is to avoid making outs. If you aren't great at getting on base, you better slug. Also, "slapping hits" is no one's job.

 

I'd say those numbers are incredibly inflated by 2000 and are a horrible indicator of what he can or can't do these days.