I would not like to see the Giants have a winning season...nothing personal
Printable View
I would not like to see the Giants have a winning season...nothing personal
The Sabathia sweepstakes came down to the Brewers and Los Angeles Dodgers, as Danny Knobler of CBSSports.com reported earlier Sunday. It is believed that the Indians spoke with the Dodgers about a package that would have included outfielder Matt Kemp, but the Dodgers also are looking for a shortstop (Pittsburgh's Jack Wilson? Toronto's David Eckstein?) and Milwaukee clinched the deal for Sabathia by offering a package centered on LaPorta, the highly touted outfield prospect the Brewers selected with the seventh overall pick in the 2007 draft.
It still doesn't say that Kemp was actually offered to Cleveland, only "it is believed" (believed by whom?) that "they spoke" about it, which could just as easily mean that Shapiro asked for him and got turned down. I tend to believe that Cleveland would take Kemp over LaPorta if he was actually offered to them. The Dodgers have little enough offense as it is right now, why would they give up a big piece of what they do have in Kemp, just to rent CC? Makes no sense.
Quote:
It still doesn't say that Kemp was actually offered to Cleveland, only "it is believed" (believed by whom?) that "they spoke" about it, which could just as easily mean that Shapiro asked for him and got turned down. I tend to believe that Cleveland would take Kemp over LaPorta if he was actually offered to them. The Dodgers have little enough offense as it is right now, why would they give up a big piece of what they do have in Kemp, just to rent CC? Makes no sense.
That's what I said...It doesnt' make any sense to trade Kemp for a few months of CC and I'm glad it was turned down if it was proposed. It also doesn't make sense to trade Kemp for Eckstein. Kemp and Nomar/Maza/Hu/Berroa is more offense than Young/Eckstein.
I don't think we have to worry about Kemp for Eckstein. Not even Ned Colletti is that dumb.
Are you sure???Quote:
Originally Posted by beerchaser
At the time I've agreed with most of Colletti's moves. Or could at least find the logic in them. They didn't all work out, but never did I want to have him lynched. Cant' say the same about Torre though.
You saw the logic in Juan Pierre getting a huge long-term deal?Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
Or what about the Andruw Jones deal??
Andruw Jones MVP!!!
I saw the logic in that one...it was expensive, but very short, and I didn't think Jones was as cooked as he now seems.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldFatGuy
I think we definately paid too much for Pierre...He's a good player. A top of the order with Pierre and Furcal should have been productive. With Furcal expected to leave and Hu to take over we still would have had a lead off man. I can see some logic in it yes.
A leadoff man should not have a .330 OBP.
I think Juan Pierre is a very good leadoff man.
You can expect a .290-.300 BA, 50+ SB, and a tough out EVERYTIME (he NEVER strikes out).
His career OBA was around .350 when he was signed.
It was .360 the year Pierre and the Marlins won the W.S.
There's logic in there.
His OBP hadn't been above .330 in 2 years, and hasn't returned. This is because he doesn't walk. When he was faster, he could leg out more infield hits, and thus batted .320 a couple times, which makes the OBP look nice. Now as his speed as lessened, so has his batting average, and he's no longer an acceptable leadoff man. With his center field defense, he's an above-replacement level starter, but not one that should be at the top of the order. Playing him as a corner outfielder, AND putting him at the top of the order, is really inexcusable. He's downright atrocious as a left fielder (not defensively, where he's probably fine, but a player with below average OBP and no power what so ever should never see consistent time in a corner spot).Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
He never strikes out, but he makes a lot of outs. My definition of a tough out is somebody that is hard to get out.Quote:
Originally Posted by koolzach1
I'm sure about that one, though I will not put it past Colletti to make some other boneheaded move to try and save his job. Lots of Dodger fans are worried about Logan White going to Seattle or some other GM job, when in fact LA ought to promote White and send Colletti packing.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldFatGuy
AgreedQuote:
Originally Posted by beerchaser
A leadoff hitter (or any other hitter) that can extend an at bat and get a pitcher to throw more pitches is a tough out. This can have a positive effect later in the game.Quote:
He never strikes out, but he makes a lot of outs. My definition of a tough out is somebody that is hard to get out.
If what they thought Matt Kemp would turn into or what they thought Andruw Jones would go back to was in center it would even out.Quote:
Playing him as a corner outfielder, AND putting him at the top of the order, is really inexcusable. He's downright atrocious as a left fielder (not defensively, where he's probably fine, but a player with below average OBP and no power what so ever should never see consistent time in a corner spot).
This is not Juan Pierre. For his career, he sees 3.44 pitches per plate appearance. That is not a particularly high total. This year, he ranks 88th in the majors with 3.79 P/PA. His career average would be ranked 160th.Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
No, it wouldn't. That bad of a bat in left field can't be evened out. You're getting a huge substantial dropoff in production out of that position as compared to the rest of the league.Quote:
If what they thought Matt Kemp would turn into or what they thought Andruw Jones would go back to was in center it would even out.
Part of the plan with Pierre was to try and get him to take more pitches. (you can question the logic of trying to make over an established player...).Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
If Pierre was in center and Kemp were in Left we wouldn't be having THIS discussion. So there's no need to have it with Pierre in left and Kemp in center. It's the same thing.Quote:
No, it wouldn't. That bad of a bat in left field can't be evened out. You're getting a huge substantial dropoff in production out of that position as compared to the rest of the league.
No, it's not, unless you don't understand the concept of positional value and the difference between the defensive value of each position.Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
Either you are misunderstanding me, or I am misunderstanding you because I know you can't be telling me that, defense aside, Pierre in center and Kemp in left is better than Kemp in center and Pierre in left. Impossible.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Yes, I can.Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
The offensive threshhold in center field is lower than that of left field by a somewhat substantial margin. The average left fielder in the NL this year has hit .263/.342/.441. The average NL center fielder has hit .259/.328/.413. This has a direct relation to the value of players.
If you play a hitter hitting .259/.328/.413 in left field, you're getting substantially less value out of him than if you play him in center field. That's because as a left fielder, he's pretty substantially below average, while he's an average center fielder. Pierre is substantially below average as both a left fielder and a center fielder, but he's closer to average at center field. Kemp is basically hitting the same as an average left fielder - .283/.339/.436.
Rather than getting slightly above average production in center field and vastly below average production in left field, you'd be getting average production from left field and below average production from center field. Adjust that further for the fact that Juan Pierre's range is more valuable in center field, and it's pretty clear that playing Juan Pierre in left and Matt Kemp in center isn't maximizing the value of both players. (Kemp in center field, alone, is actually a great value play. It's just that Pierre is so bad that he really doesn't have business as a starter at this point in his career)
I understand that the average left-fielder has higher numbers than the average centerfielder.
I also understand that if you have the exact same two players batting in the same place in the order your team is going to do exactly the same offensively.
This statement, and others, led me to believe that we were not considering defense in this discussion. Both Pierre and Kemp have good speed and less than great abilities to react to the ball. So, I'm considering them as equal defenders.Quote:
No, it wouldn't. That bad of a bat in left field can't be evened out. You're getting a huge substantial dropoff in production out of that position as compared to the rest of the league.
Yes, that's true, and I haven't said otherwise. I'm speaking in terms of overall value the players provide though, which is relative to the league and position.Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok