Sox still interested in Willy Taveras

[Hawkfan]

good analysis, but willy taveras can go to hell

[Jordan4life_2007]

I've been making this argument for 2 days now and I'm over it. Bottom line, we don't have a reliable CF or leadoff hitter right now and unless we sell the farm we're not going to end up with Ellsbury patrolling center this next season. Taveras is an experienced player, plays good D, can hit and steal bases, doesn't make a ton of money, can probably be had for some minor prospects and will hold things down until we see what Danks can do. He fills two needs for us and does so cheaply. You can't have world beaters at every position on the field. Do people really think that a 28 year old Jerry Owens is going to be our man next year? He's got 1/2 season in the majors and is almost 28, doesn't inspire much confidence in me.

 

This is kinda my thinking. I'm far from crazy about Taveras, but what are the other options? He's better than anything we have right now. He's provides what Ozzie has wanted for years (Key words being what Ozzie wants. Not what a Soxtalker wants or feels is an acceptable leadoff man), and won't cost a s***load. All I would want for Willy to do is get on base at a .360 or better clip (his 2007 season would be more than acceptable to me). Everything else would take care of itself.

Edited December 1, 2008 by Jordan4life

[eickevinmorris]

This is kinda my thinking. I'm far from crazy about Taveras, but what are the other options? He's better than anything we have right now. He's provides what Ozzie has wanted for years (Key words being what Ozzie wants. Not what a Soxtalker wants or feels is an acceptable leadoff man), and won't cost a s***load. All I would want for Willy to do is get on base at a .360 or better clip (his 2007 season would be more than acceptable to me). Everything else would take care of itself.

I'd like it to rain pop tarts, but it's not happening. Taveras is not going to replicate his extremely lucky 2007 numbers when moving to a more difficult league. In fact, he won't replicate them in the NL. He's not very good.

 

Also, I couldn't possibly care less what/who Ozzie wants. He's not the GM. If he wants speed, it better come in the form of a good hitter.

[Hatchetman]

His career runs scored per AB are horrible. Ergo, dude sucks.

[Jordan4life_2007]

I'd like it to rain pop tarts, but it's not happening. Taveras is not going to replicate his extremely lucky 2007 numbers when moving to a more difficult league. In fact, he won't replicate them in the NL. He's not very good.

 

Well it has been officially settled now! Kevin says Taveras won't be able to duplicate his "extremely lucky" numbers in the much tougher al (when did the any player from the NL will struggle in the AL myth start anyway?). So let's holler at the Indians and see what they want for Sizemore!

 

Also, I couldn't possibly care less what/who Ozzie wants. He's not the GM. If he wants speed, it better come in the form of a good hitter.

 

And thankfully KW, Ozzie and anybody else who actually matters couldn't give a damn about what you want. I want a naked Beyonce sitting in my lap right now. Not gonna happen because I want it.

Edited December 1, 2008 by Jordan4life

[caulfield12]

I'll take Jessica Alba, Alyssa Milano and the new Bond girl, lol.

 

I'm so tired of this "lucky/unlucky" non-sense to say someone sucks or explain why someone who sucks doesn't suck. Ugh. It's not an argument. It's an opinion that was invalidated very clearly earlier in this thread. Taveras puts a lot of balls in play on the infield, and he has about a 50% chance of getting a single whenever he puts a bunt into play. It's not like Konerko/Thome/Dye/AJ/Crede...who have about a 5-10% chance of legging out a base hit on any grounder they pull on the infield. That's not any analysis or depending on your eyes. I'm sure almost nobody watched this guy play more than 5-10 games last year, and yet everyone is acting like they're Larry Himes.

 

SURE, THERE IS A MINIMAL RISK...but IF Taveras doesn't perform, we move him to 9th and try something else....or we simply go with Anderson and Owens. I don't see what the problem is, and why so many are leading a "Spanish Inquisition" against Taveras like he has a cross between ebola, the bubonic plague and SARS?

 

I have yet to see anyone criticizing Taveras come up with a better answer...who it would be, and REALISTICALLY, what we would have to give up.

 

Gee, I feel very confident about a leadoff "committee" comprised of Anderson, Owens, Ramirez and Getz depending on the match-ups. NOT SO MUCH.

 

We are not getting Figgins. We are not signing Hudson for 4-5 years with Beckham possibly arriving this season. We are NOT giving away half our organization for a year or so of Brian Roberts. Let's get back to reality, not a Dr. Who episode.

Edited December 1, 2008 by caulfield12

[Hatchetman]

Someone explain to me how Taveras is a better hitter than Anderson....cuz I don't see it.

[Felix]

Can you explain to me with this reasoning why Gregor Blanco drew almost twice as many walks as Ryan Braun?

Or why the one of the best base stealers in history, Rickey Henderson, (who averaged 74 stolen bases per 162 over a 25 year career) averaged over 100 walks per 162 games.

 

There comes a time when you look at players being "pitched around." There also comes a time when the statistics flat out tell you a story about a player. Willy Taveras is an aggressive hitter whose OBP depends entirely upon his average, and if he doesn't hit for a good average, he won't be a good player. It's as simple as that.

 

If Willy Taveras is the last ditch effort and the Sox trade for him in the middle of January, I'll understand. Willy Taveras should not be the major move for the White Sox this offseason.

Exactly.

 

Someone explain to me how Taveras is a better hitter than Anderson....cuz I don't see it.

Because he's fast, but only if he has the support of the fans and they cheer him on. If the fans start booing though, well.. it's not his fault.

Edited December 1, 2008 by Felix

[caulfield12]

Someone explain to me how Taveras is a better hitter than Anderson....cuz I don't see it.

 

 

Someone tell me why/how Brian Anderson would be a BETTER leadoff hitter than Taveras?

 

How we will magically acquire Figgins or Roberts without giving up any "core" players, or sign Orlando Hudson for 4-5 years without blocking Beckham's path to the major leagues?

 

I've seen one poster suggest Chris Getz be our leadoff hitter because where you bat in the line-up isn't statistically significant.

 

Does anyone else have a better solution than Owens or Alexei "Soriano" Ramirez, whose OBP will probably be lower than Taveras'?

[Hatchetman]

I'd put Getz there because where you bat in the line-up isn't statistically significant.

[R.J.]

It's a little early in the offseason to begin settling on this guy as our target for center field. He'll still be there in February. We should at least look around a little and see if we can find someone who can top an OPS+ of 56.

 

No, I don't have any names for you. I agree that Roberts and Figgins might be too expensive to acquire. But it's December 1st. Let's look at who gets non-tendered. Let's look at any free agents who are undervalued. Let's look at what kind of prospects are available if and when we decide to move Dye or Javy or Jenks. Let things develop before you close the book and say "this is it, it's this guy or nobody."

 

Yes, if the Rockies are only asking for Broadway or Logan, then there's no risk on our part. In that case, what the hell, go for it. I have no problem trading our garbage for some new garbage. Just don't then promise said garbage a lead-off spot and a starting job and stop looking for better options.

 

I think there are a few minor league free agents who can put up a .604 OPS and play center field. We've got 2 months before we need to wave this white flag.

Edited December 1, 2008 by R.J.

[ptatc]

Someone tell me why/how Brian Anderson would be a BETTER leadoff hitter than Taveras?

 

How we will magically acquire Figgins or Roberts without giving up any "core" players, or sign Orlando Hudson for 4-5 years without blocking Beckham's path to the major leagues?

 

I've seen one poster suggest Chris Getz be our leadoff hitter because where you bat in the line-up isn't statistically significant.

 

Does anyone else have a better solution than Owens or Alexei "Soriano" Ramirez, whose OBP will probably be lower than Taveras'?

 

Maybe Beckham moves to third? I don't think the organization has decided where he will play. He played SS in the brief minors stint. He played 2B in the AFL because it's where they had an opening for a late addition player.

 

My guess is they play him at SS in AA next year and make a decision after a full year in the minors.

[almagest]

Willy Taveras is an aggressive hitter whose OBP depends entirely upon his average, and if he doesn't hit for a good average, he won't be a good player. It's as simple as that.

 

If Willy Taveras is the last ditch effort and the Sox trade for him in the middle of January, I'll understand. Willy Taveras should not be the major move for the White Sox this offseason.

Yeah, this pretty much sums it up. You can ignore and/or cherry pick whatever stats you want, and you can post however many "intimidating" walls of text that you want, but Wily Taveras is a one-dimensional player who relies entirely on his batting average for offensive production -- if he doesn't hit ~.300, he's worthless.

[scenario]

I'd put Getz in there because I think he would be a good leadoff hitter.

 

I can't believe we've had two whole threads debating the value of acquiring Willy Taveras.

 

Take away his one good year (out of 4) and he looks like the definition of a marginal 4th outfielder.

 

My guess is that if he was on the team right now, the debate would be about who we could dump him on and whether we could get a half-way decent prospect for him.

 

 

 

[Steve9347]

That's a lot of research done to prove a point that a crappy player isn't crappy.

 

If we want to go the route of Scott Podsednik again, then we get Willy. No big deal... I personally would like a guy who can do more than just run, but I'd rather see Taveras out there than Owens.

[ThunderBolt]

I'd put Getz there because where you bat in the line-up isn't statistically significant.

I put our current roster in an optimal lineup generator, and this was what I got.

Q

Konerko

Fields

Dye

BA

Ramirez

AJ

Thome

Nix

Statistically speaking this lineup would average about 5.4666 runs per game.

You give a manager our roster of players, he’d be insane to put this lineup on the field. It seems ludicrous, right? But it makes sense. As soon as we shed the notion that lineup order has a profound impact on the game we’ll be better for it. You put your best bats in the position to get more at-bats, and you put your more-discipline players near the top of the order. Speed doesn’t matter, when the player who has it doesn’t get on base enough to use it.

 

[Hatchetman]

what's the logic behind that thing? So BA is a better hitter than Thome?

[ThunderBolt]

what's the logic behind that thing? So BA is a better hitter than Thome?

I’m not a big math guy so i‘m probably not the best one to analyze just how the generation is run.. It takes OPB and Slg into account, and basically factors it out so that the more balanced players are favored for the top of the lineup. I assume it sees a guy like Thome, and says that while he has massive pop, he does tend to chase bad pitches, which damages his value significantly. Also, the numbers the generator was using were Anderson’s, Fields and Nix’s minor league numbers, because the sample size was still too small to properly project a full seasons worth of stats. This is strictly an optimal thing, and while I don’t find it extremely accurate, I do find it interesting that it would suggest a lineup like this that seemingly defies rational logic.

[caulfield12]

The problem is that there is VERY LITTLE resemblance between BA's minor and major league numbers.

 

They're basing Ramirez off one year in the big leagues or his Cuban League stats?

 

Fields batting third is ludicrous.

 

Thome getting less at-bats than most members of the team when he consistenly has one of the highest OBP's and OPS's???

 

 

 

[caulfield12]

I'd put Getz in there because I think he would be a good leadoff hitter.

 

I can't believe we've had two whole threads debating the value of acquiring Willy Taveras.

 

Take away his one good year (out of 4) and he looks like the definition of a marginal 4th outfielder.

 

My guess is that if he was on the team right now, the debate would be about who we could dump him on and whether we could get a half-way decent prospect for him.

 

When was the last time a Sox middle infield prospect came up to the big league team and was able to successfully bat anywhere in the line-up besides the bottom three spots in the order for the first 2-3 years of his career?

 

Ray Durham? (No, I don't think we can count Willie Harris as successful for the purposes of this) Caruso for one year?

 

I just don't see how Getz, who almost everyone projects as a "very marginal" MLB starting 2B, can successfully handle the pressure of batting leadoff in his rookie season...? Maybe those who have watched Getz in our system see something that confounds common wisdom in terms of maturity, poise or make-up...but I'm not seeing how we're better off with Getz leading off than Taveras. Just can't buy that idea.

 

[scenario]

When was the last time a Sox middle infield prospect came up to the big league team and was able to successfully bat anywhere in the line-up besides the bottom three spots in the order for the first 2-3 years of his career? Ray Durham? (No, I don't think we can count Willie Harris as successful for the purposes of this) Caruso for one year?

 

I just don't see how Getz, who almost everyone projects as a "very marginal" MLB starting 2B, can successfully handle the pressure of batting leadoff in his rookie season...? Maybe those who have watched Getz in our system see something that confounds common wisdom in terms of maturity, poise or make-up...but I'm not seeing how we're better off with Getz leading off than Taveras. Just can't buy that idea.

 

 

Regarding your first point, I'm not sure what the Sox history of futility drafting middle infielders has to do with whether or not Getz can leadoff.

 

Getz is a good contact hitter with an exceptional batting eye and plus speed. That has been his reputation since college and the reason the Sox thought enough of him to make him a relatively high pick.

 

The only thing that makes him "marginal" is the question of whether he'll hit with enough power to be a starter long term. (Btw, I don't think there is any question that Getz has more power than Taveras, so shouldn't the same 'marginal' argument apply to Willy?)

 

And batting eye... no comparison. Getz consistently walks more than he strikes out. Taveras' career situational stats show that if he gets behind in the count at any point, he is absolute toast.

 

IMO, it seems like you would rather go with a mediocre 'known' leadoff guy than a potentially better but unproven leadoff guy...

 

I'll take Getz.

Edited December 1, 2008 by scenario

[caulfield12]

Regarding your first point, I'm not sure what the Sox history of futility drafting middle infielders has to do with whether or not Getz can leadoff.

 

Getz is a good contact hitter with an exceptional batting eye and plus speed. That has been his reputation since college and the reason the Sox thought enough of him to make him a relatively high pick.

 

The only thing that makes him "marginal" is the question of whether he'll hit with enough power to be a starter long term. (Btw, I don't think there is any question that Getz has more power than Taveras, so shouldn't the same 'marginal' argument apply to Willy?)

 

And batting eye... no comparison. Getz consistently walks more than he strikes out. Taveras' career situational stats show that if he gets behind in the count at any point, he is absolute toast.

 

IMO, it seems like you would rather go with a mediocre 'known' leadoff guy than a potentially better but unproven leadoff guy...

 

I'll take Getz.

 

 

Getz will wear the label (like Miles, like Eckstein, Adam Kennedy, Aviles, McEwing, etc.) of being "scrappy" and a grinder, but he doesn't really have one "plus" tool. (Maybe some will argue he will consistently be a .300+ hitter like Aviles MIGHT be...)

 

Taveras has two and arguably three, his speed, defense and arm from CF. I guess you can still make the same argument for Brian Anderson....that he has 2-3 legit "plus" tools (defense and power), which is probably why KW hasn't given up on him quite yet.

 

Getz is the type of player who will have to prove himself year after year as a starter because scouts and the FO won't quite trust him as an everyday player, because he's going to put up "so-so" or at best average offensive numbers for his position each year. Yet he will always be a better player (like Iguchi) than the sum of all his parts or tools.

 

I just think there's a good reason very few Sox rookies since Guillen/Durham/Cameron/Chris Young have come up and made immediate impacts at the top of the order. It's not easy to do so, and to be a rookie, too. KW would feel that's putting too much pressure on an untested player and he wouldn't be able to relax and just play his game.

Edited December 1, 2008 by caulfield12

[ThunderBolt]

The problem is that there is VERY LITTLE resemblance between BA's minor and major league numbers.

 

They're basing Ramirez off one year in the big leagues or his Cuban League stats?

 

Fields batting third is ludicrous.

 

Thome getting less at-bats than most members of the team when he consistenly has one of the highest OBP's and OPS's???

Agreed. There are enough exaggerations and projections in the simulation to pretty much discredit it as a viable projection tool. It just serves as an example that in a perfect world,(where BA lives up to the hype, Nix plays solid at the majors, and Fields, Ramirez, And Q performing at the peak level) that seemingly a non-traditional lineup would produce a comparable result to a tried and true lineup. I’m not making a case for the system, but rather the differing views on the importance of lineup orders.

[caulfield12]

Not only that, but the most important thing with either Nix or Getz is playing sound defense and not looking quite so bad as Royce Clayton or Mark Johnson at the plate...just not being "automatic" outs and holding their own defensively. We all know that Betemit is a so-so defender (like Figgins) pretty much everywhere you stick him, but KW must have preferred his upside offensive potential (especially when you break down the splits) to Uribe's obvious and well-documented offensive flaws. Because you're almost never going to find anyone who can play those three IF positions as well defensively as Uribe...maybe nobody in baseball, actually. One, but not all three.

 

 

[scenario]

Getz will wear the label (like Miles, like Eckstein, Adam Kennedy, Aviles, McEwing, etc.) of being "scrappy" and a grinder, but he doesn't really have one "plus" tool. (Maybe some will argue he will consistently be a .300+ hitter like Aviles MIGHT be...)

 

Taveras has two and arguably three, his speed, defense and arm from CF. I guess you can still make the same argument for Brian Anderson....that he has 2-3 legit "plus" tools (defense and power), which is probably why KW hasn't given up on him quite yet.

 

 

Who would you rather have as a leadoff hitter? A guy with plus speed and a great batting eye who getz on base? Or a guy with ++ speed, strong defense, and a great arm?

 

IMO, Taveras has one problem that makes him ill equipped for the job.... he's not a good hitter. And I'm not terribly excited about making a guy whose claim to fame is good defense our next leadoff hitter.

 

Frankly, I don't see Taveras as being a significant upgrade over Owens. In fact, I think it's likely Owens could turn out to be a better offensive player.

 

I'm not a huge Anderson fan either, but I would put Brian out there in a second instead of Taveras as our starting CF.

 

(I suppose you could guess I'm not much a Taveras fan, eh?)

Edited December 1, 2008 by scenario