Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block

    In Response to Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block:
    [QUOTE]In case anybody thought Jurgens (and his 5.88 ERA  for $5.1 MM) would be cheap, here's his asking price: "The Braves are looking for a Zack Greinke -like return in a deal for Jair Jurrjens , according to Heyman (on Twitter ). The Royals obtained Jake Odorizzi , Lorenzo Cain , Alcides Escobar and Jeremy Jeffress for Greinke and Yuniesky Betancourt last offseason."
    Posted by TheRedStain[/QUOTE]

    I don't buy it - Heyman likes to make things up when he 'tweets'.  The Braves aren't the Royals - they were one win from the post-season last year.  If they trade Jurrjens it will be for immediate impact offense.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block

    In Response to Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block : No he can't. Not with the expanse behind him in right. And with the curious configuration to deal with. Indeed, not all singles are created equal. Many are ground balls, for which speed in the outfield is no defense.  There you go again. Drew got a great jump on balls and normally went right to where they would fall or sink. You cannot say for certain ( again ) that Crawford would catch balls that drop in front of Drew. Drew was very quick and had a quick release. He was also excellent charging ground-ball singles. You've made an unfortunate comparison. We are not talking about sprinters but ballplayers. Let's see first whether Crawford can improve his game in left, which has always been his standard position. On questionable balls, runners are supposed to hesitate no matter who is in the outfield -- unless the man is a notorious brown dog.  Do you really think that Crawford would make that much of a difference, as opposed to the difference in arms? I mean day in and day out. You are trying to rewrite all the calculations made over time that have put the best arm in right, all things considered. You don't change all of that to accommodate a really bad arm. 
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    EX,
    While I get that there are tangable reasons why it doesn't make sense to move "Crawford" RF. All of which you outlined above. The pro is that it opens up the profile of players we could sign to play left. The cons might outweight any gain we'd get from moving him and aquiring a prototyipal left fielder (Cuddayer or Willlingham). Just for the sake of continuity alone the team might be better served to let him stay in left and hopefully he shows up ready to hit the ball and put 2011 behind him...

    Frankly his athleticism is somewhat wasted playing left in Fenway. Where he certainly had his share of struggles adjusting to the omnipresent wall over his shoulder. I would expect him to be much improved next year, after a year of learning how to judge the flight of the ball off the bat in relation to where he's positioning himself for each hitter. The toughest part of playing left at fenway is knowing when to make a play for the ball or play it off the wall and make a strong acurate throw to second...Something Manny learned to do quite well and Yaz was the master at...
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block

    In Response to Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block:
    [QUOTE]"I don't understand the 2nd to home argument - Crawford can play the exact same distance from home in right as he could in left." Except in Fenway. The right fielder has to throw from 380 feet away, the center fielder from over 400 on rare occasions but the left fielder has a much shorter field, between 300' and 350' depending how far toward center. A strong arm, utilized in right, is squandered in left.
    Posted by TheRedStain[/QUOTE]

    That's assuming all throws are from the wall.  I'm not suggesting we put a guy with a cannon in left - just that speed is at least as valuable as arm strength in right.


     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block

    In Response to Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block : That's assuming all throws are from the wall.  I'm not suggesting we put a guy with a cannon in left - just that speed is at least as valuable as arm strength in right.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]
    You know that we disagree on your last point. 
    I don't think the poster is suggesting that all throws are made from the wall. That would be foolish, and he doesn't sound foolish.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block

    In Response to Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block : EX, While I get that there are tangable reasons why it doesn't make sense to move "Crawford" RF. All of which you outlined above. The pro is that it opens up the profile of players we could sign to play left. The cons might outweight any gain we'd get from moving him and aquiring a prototyipal left fielder (Cuddayer or Willlingham). Just for the sake of continuity alone the team might be better served to let him stay in left and hopefully he shows up ready to hit the ball and put 2011 behind him... Frankly his athleticism is somewhat wasted playing left in Fenway. Where he certainly had his share of struggles adjusting to the omnipresent wall over his shoulder. I would expect him to be much improved next year, after a year of learning how to judge the flight of the ball off the bat in relation to where he's positioning himself for each hitter. The toughest part of playing left at fenway is knowing when to make a play for the ball or play it off the wall and make a strong acurate throw to second...Something Manny learned to do quite well and Yaz was the master at...
    Posted by Beantowne[/QUOTE]
    Crawford does make "a strong accurate throw" anywhere.
    His athleticism would not be wasted in left if he played shallower and learned to intercept liners and bloopers before they dropped in for singles. High fly balls and pop ups that hang between him and the wall give him time ( with his athleticism ) to retreat and catch them. Balls that are smoked are either going to hit the wall or go over it. It's the shorty bingles that break the heart. Why not take advantage of Crawford's athleticism and Fenway's crimped space and try to intercept more of them. Besides, with all that speed he should take some of the pressure off in left-center and thus allow Ellsbury a better shot at balls in no man's land. 
    Frankly, I was often puzzled by Boston's defensive alignments last season. They did not always seem predicated on defending against the potentially most damaging play. In fact, in general, the Sox were not an alert baseball team. Not by a long stretch.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block

    In Response to Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block : You know that we disagree on your last point.  I don't think the poster is suggesting that all throws are made from the wall. That would be foolish, and he doesn't sound foolish.
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    Well, if he would just agree with me, he would sound less foolish!  I'm just joking - I appreciate the debate :)



     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block

    In Response to Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jair Jurrjens and Martin Prado on the Trading block : Well, if he would just agree with me, he would sound less foolish!  I'm just joking - I appreciate the debate :)
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]
    I know you do. So far, the debate has been pretty good-natured.

     

Share