Posts: 2,696
Threads: 47
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=69682:date=Nov 19 2009, 09:49 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Nov 19 2009, 09:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69607:date=Nov 19 2009, 02:06 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Nov 19 2009, 02:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69605:date=Nov 19 2009, 02:03 PM:name=MW4)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MW4 @ Nov 19 2009, 02:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69602:date=Nov 19 2009, 11:57 AM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Nov 19 2009, 11:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69599:date=Nov 19 2009, 01:50 PM:name=MW4)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MW4 @ Nov 19 2009, 01:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I didn't see anywhere people talking about this article from MLB insiders club magazine
Seems like a sharp guy.
Does this change anyone's opinion?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He's always seemed like a really good guy and he does a great interview. But that's pretty secondary. Not even secondary -- tertiary. Maybe even below that (whatever the word for that is).
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well...I never saw uncle Milty in an article like that, just sayin.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Uncle Milty's biggest problem last season was that he didn't hit like he usually hits. If he stays healthy (like he did) and hits the ball (he didn't), most of his shenanigans are forgiven without a second thought.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Needless to say, I agree with Butch on this one. If Ol' Milty is leading the league in OPS, (which would mean that the Cubs are winning a lot more games), you don't think there's a whole lot less tension in the clubhouse and in the stands?
As far as Granderson: he is a sharp guy, perhaps one of the coolest big leaguers out there. I love him. But as Butch implied, being a great player on the field is more important to me.
I also think Crawford's value <i>is</i> certainly higher than Granderson's, and I agree that he would "fit" better in our lineup. He'd be a true leadoff hitter, and he could man CF (and probably win a Gold Glove...he's probably the best fielding LFer in baseball.)
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're actually picking the guy with the lower on base ability? I'm floored. Absolutely, utterly, completely baffled.
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
According to the stats given, Crawford's OBP was 35 points higher.
I don't get it. Are their career stats drastically different from last year's?
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 2,696
Threads: 47
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=69687:date=Nov 19 2009, 10:01 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Nov 19 2009, 10:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->According to the stats given, Crawford's OBP was 35 points higher.
I don't get it. Are their career stats drastically different from last year's?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes.
Granderson
Crawford
As bad of a year as Granderson had last year (which accounted for 25% of his PAs for his career) he still beats Crawford for lifetime OBP. Also, as I and Ace have said multiple times, Granderson had a miserably unlucky year. This is not my opinion. It may be debatable, but when a player has a 21% line drive percentage and a .275 BABIP, luck is not an opinion at that point. He basically hit a whole bunch of line drives right at fielders. Trends seem to point to the fact that those line drives will not be hit at defenders as much going forward.
And the guy has power! Crawford has decent power and can hit 15 HRs. Granderson hit 30 HRs last year and 10 of them were at Comerica Park.
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Scarey, as I said on Ace's website, you and Ace have both made some very solid points about Granderson, and have basically convinced me. I'm serious.
Let's get him.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 2,911
Threads: 67
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
Still like Crawford better. By far. Granderson is damn near another all or nothing type like Soriano. Granderson's strike zone awareness is hideous and he is nearly an automatic out against LH pitching. Granderson batting leadoff makes no seanse. Crawford batting leadoff makes us a much better team. Granderson is considered a middle of the road defender. Crawford is considered the best LFer in baseball and widely considered the best OFer in baseball.
Posts: 2,696
Threads: 47
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=69691:date=Nov 19 2009, 10:12 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Nov 19 2009, 10:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Scarey, as I said on Ace's website, you and Ace have both made some very solid points about Granderson, and have basically convinced me. I'm serious.
Let's get him.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That depends. I'm hearing things such as Vitters, Castro, Jackson, and Theriot for Granderson. That would be ridiculous.
If the Cubs took on all of Granderson's money owed (which is supposedly a big motivator in them wanting to trade him) and had to part with a package like Jackson, Fox, and Flaherty I think I could live with that.
As much as I would love to have Granderson on this team, I think the organization needs to start building the team differently. They need to start bringing in home grown talent and fill in the holes with high priced talent, not the other way around. It's for that reason that I'm reluctant to trade away prospects. Not because I think Vitters, or Castro, or anyone else will be more valuable down the road. But for the fact that we cannot sign every roster spot to a $10+ million/year deal.
Posts: 2,911
Threads: 67
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=69695:date=Nov 19 2009, 10:29 PM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Nov 19 2009, 10:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69691:date=Nov 19 2009, 10:12 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Nov 19 2009, 10:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Scarey, as I said on Ace's website, you and Ace have both made some very solid points about Granderson, and have basically convinced me. I'm serious.
Let's get him.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That depends. I'm hearing things such as Vitters, Castro, Jackson, and Theriot for Granderson. That would be ridiculous.
If the Cubs took on all of Granderson's money owed (which is supposedly a big motivator in them wanting to trade him) and had to part with a package like Jackson, Fox, and Flaherty I think I could live with that.
<b>As much as I would love to have Granderson on this team, I think the organization needs to start building the team differently. They need to start bringing in home grown talent and fill in the holes with high priced talent, not the other way around. It's for that reason that I'm reluctant to trade away prospects. Not because I think Vitters, or Castro, or anyone else will be more valuable down the road. But for the fact that we cannot sign every roster spot to a $10+ million/year deal.</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Scarey, we most definitely agree on the above bolded paragraph.
Posts: 2,696
Threads: 47
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=69694:date=Nov 19 2009, 10:29 PM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Nov 19 2009, 10:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Granderson is damn near another all or nothing type like Soriano.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I disagree with that. Granderson has the ability to take a walk.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Granderson's strike zone awareness is hideous<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As I said earlier, he's averaged 65 BBs the last 4 years. Crawford had a career high this year with 50. His next highest total after that would be 35.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->and he is nearly an automatic out against LH pitching.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While I agree that he's not very good against LHP, 80% of the 2009 Chicago Cubs' plate appearances were against RHP. Right handed center fielders are a dime a dozen and shouldn't be hard to get a decent one.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Granderson batting leadoff makes no seanse.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree, which is why he would be great as a #5 behind Aramis.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Crawford batting leadoff makes us a much better team.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I disagree. Again, Granderson gets on base at a better rate and hits for much more power. I don't care how many bases Crawford steals. If Granderson does those two things better than Crawford, then Granderson makes this team better.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Granderson is considered a middle of the road defender.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I honestly can't give you an opinion on Granderson's centerfielding ability because I haven't seen him play much. I also can't give you an opinion for Crawford because he hasn't played CF much. I can tell you that the only metric I put much stock into, the fielding bible's plus/minus system, Granderson was the 8th best centerfielders in MLB from 2006-2008. That tells me that he's at least better than average. Crawford ranked 2nd among LFers. I still have to question why he was never given a chance over such great centerfielders as Rocco Baldelli, Damon Hollins, and Randy Winn.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Crawford is considered the best LFer in baseball and widely considered the best OFer in baseball.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not saying I disagree with this, but I have never heard of him being the best outfielder in baseball. I would think he would at least be in right field or center field on his own team if that were the case.
Posts: 2,696
Threads: 47
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=69696:date=Nov 19 2009, 10:31 PM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Nov 19 2009, 10:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69695:date=Nov 19 2009, 10:29 PM:name=Scarey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Nov 19 2009, 10:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69691:date=Nov 19 2009, 10:12 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Nov 19 2009, 10:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Scarey, as I said on Ace's website, you and Ace have both made some very solid points about Granderson, and have basically convinced me. I'm serious.
Let's get him.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That depends. I'm hearing things such as Vitters, Castro, Jackson, and Theriot for Granderson. That would be ridiculous.
If the Cubs took on all of Granderson's money owed (which is supposedly a big motivator in them wanting to trade him) and had to part with a package like Jackson, Fox, and Flaherty I think I could live with that.
<b>As much as I would love to have Granderson on this team, I think the organization needs to start building the team differently. They need to start bringing in home grown talent and fill in the holes with high priced talent, not the other way around. It's for that reason that I'm reluctant to trade away prospects. Not because I think Vitters, or Castro, or anyone else will be more valuable down the road. But for the fact that we cannot sign every roster spot to a $10+ million/year deal.</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Scarey, we most definitely agree on the above bolded paragraph.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For sure. I think we just disagree on which guy we would want if forced to trade for either Granderson or Crawford. Right?
Posts: 2,911
Threads: 67
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=69699:date=Nov 19 2009, 10:52 PM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Nov 19 2009, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69696:date=Nov 19 2009, 10:31 PM:name=Coldneck)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Coldneck @ Nov 19 2009, 10:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69695:date=Nov 19 2009, 10:29 PM:name=Scarey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Nov 19 2009, 10:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69691:date=Nov 19 2009, 10:12 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Nov 19 2009, 10:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Scarey, as I said on Ace's website, you and Ace have both made some very solid points about Granderson, and have basically convinced me. I'm serious.
Let's get him.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That depends. I'm hearing things such as Vitters, Castro, Jackson, and Theriot for Granderson. That would be ridiculous.
If the Cubs took on all of Granderson's money owed (which is supposedly a big motivator in them wanting to trade him) and had to part with a package like Jackson, Fox, and Flaherty I think I could live with that.
<b>As much as I would love to have Granderson on this team, I think the organization needs to start building the team differently. They need to start bringing in home grown talent and fill in the holes with high priced talent, not the other way around. It's for that reason that I'm reluctant to trade away prospects. Not because I think Vitters, or Castro, or anyone else will be more valuable down the road. But for the fact that we cannot sign every roster spot to a $10+ million/year deal.</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Scarey, we most definitely agree on the above bolded paragraph.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For sure. I think we just disagree on which guy we would want if forced to trade for either Granderson or Crawford. Right?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yup.
Posts: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
in spite of all the convincing arguments scarey made about granderson, i still like crawford better. maybe i'm just blinded by .249 ave and 141 strikeouts. i hate players like that, unless they can hit 50 home runs and drive in 140. even then, i'm skeptical.
Wang.
Posts: 2,911
Threads: 67
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=69742:date=Nov 20 2009, 10:21 AM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Nov 20 2009, 10:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->in spite of all the convincing arguments scarey made about granderson, i still like crawford better. maybe i'm just blinded by .249 ave and 141 strikeouts. i hate players like that, unless they can hit 50 home runs and drive in 140. even then, i'm skeptical.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
you want to make out with me?
Posts: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=69793:date=Nov 20 2009, 12:58 PM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Nov 20 2009, 12:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69742:date=Nov 20 2009, 10:21 AM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Nov 20 2009, 10:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->in spite of all the convincing arguments scarey made about granderson, i still like crawford better. maybe i'm just blinded by .249 ave and 141 strikeouts. i hate players like that, unless they can hit 50 home runs and drive in 140. even then, i'm skeptical.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
you want to make out with me?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i would, but your anti-cutler stance makes me think twice.
Wang.
Posts: 2,911
Threads: 67
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=69794:date=Nov 20 2009, 02:02 PM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Nov 20 2009, 02:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69793:date=Nov 20 2009, 12:58 PM:name=Coldneck)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Coldneck @ Nov 20 2009, 12:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69742:date=Nov 20 2009, 10:21 AM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Nov 20 2009, 10:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->in spite of all the convincing arguments scarey made about granderson, i still like crawford better. maybe i'm just blinded by .249 ave and 141 strikeouts. i hate players like that, unless they can hit 50 home runs and drive in 140. even then, i'm skeptical.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
you want to make out with me?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i would, but your anti-cutler stance makes me think twice.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How about a reach around at the very least. I really could care less about Cutler. I just don't think he's that good. I'm not a Bears fan either.
Posts: 6,476
Threads: 24
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
All of a sudden there's a whole lot of man on man love going on in this thread...
|
