Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    How about BHall?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise! : Context. The era of Yaz was different. Some of Yaz's prime years were during the pitching era (mound height). Also, we had nobody better on the bench vs LHPs than Yaz. That is not the case with CC. We have better choices and we can get another cheap choice this off season.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Yaz played, what, 23 years? Many in a hitting era. Are you saying nobody in any single season over 23 years had a better OPS vs. lefties than Yaz?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    he also played with broken ribs, he played in pain for about every one of his last 10 years in the game. He also won batting titles in a deadball era, he also won batting title and Triple Crown and carried a team to a pennant on his back, practically on his own. He also saved the team in 75 with his defense in LF after Rice got hurt. And he also gave his team a lead in the biggest game of the last 30 years for one game deciding a playoff spot..homering off the best pitcher on the planet that year--a lefty named Guidry. And he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, and he got 3,000 hits, and he got 400 homers, and no one has won a Triple Crown ever since his feat. You are really pi-zz-ing me off on Mr. Yastrzemski. I think you need a tar and feathering from Mike Easy Man Easler for your misconduct.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise! : Yaz played, what, 23 years? Many in a hitting era. Are you saying nobody in any single season over 23 years had a better OPS vs. lefties than Yaz?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Awhile ago, I actually went back and looked at every year and found very few bench players with a significantly higher OPS vs LHPs that would warrant sitting the better overall player in Yaz (including fielding). I have never argued for a player to be platooned because someone else has a .100 point advantage over a half a season. I look at 2-3 year recent trends. If both players are equal defensively and baserunning, but one player is way way better vs RHPs, I'd want to see about a .050 or more differential vs LHPs to make it clear a platoon should occur. I do recognize some value in preventing late-inning bullpen switches by not platooing over a minimal OPS swing.

    Overall OPS is important even if a player is really bad vs LHPs or RHPs. There comes a point where the tradeoff outweighs the benefits and a platoon is called for. I think my threshold maybe lower than most.

    There might be a single season somewhere where one guy had a much better OPS vs LHPs than Yaz, but was not platooned. I do not recall me finding one guy who had a track record of better OPS vs LHPs on the bench while Yaz played. I tried to find my data on my old computer, but it's messed up. I'll try again later.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!:
    [QUOTE]he also played with broken ribs, he played in pain for about every one of his last 10 years in the game. He also won batting titles in a deadball era, he also won batting title and Triple Crown and carried a team to a pennant on his back, practically on his own. He also saved the team in 75 with his defense in LF after Rice got hurt. And he also gave his team a lead in the biggest game of the last 30 years for one game deciding a playoff spot..homering off the best pitcher on the planet that year--a lefty named Guidry. And he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, and he got 3,000 hits, and he got 400 homers, and no one has won a Triple Crown ever since his feat. You are really pi-zz-ing me off on Mr. Yastrzemski. I think you need a tar and feathering from Mike Easy Man Easler for your misconduct.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]


    And I think you need to open the windows more often, homer.
    Growing up around Boston, I wouldn't even attend a game unless Yaz was in the line-up. I'm simply stating the truth. Even Yaz himself admitted if he had to do it over again, he'd have been a switch-hitter. His career OPS vs. lefties was .692.

    I'm aware of his playing hurt.
    I'm aware of the pitching eras he played in.
    I'm also aware of his level of concentration, which could negate a lefty-lefty match-up.

    I feel as strongly toward calling Crawford, who has a career OPS just 10 points lower than Yaz, a "glorified platoon hitter", as both you and I do about Yaz.
    I'm using this particular HOF'er to illustrate the fact that there are many good/great lefty hitters who had issues with southpaws....and weren't platoon players.

    Furthermore, Crawford has shown the ability to hit lefties in the past.
    .776 OPS in '06.
    .837 OPS in '07.
    To put such a crude label on him (Moon's label) after 5 months into a 7-year deal is what isn't fair.

    Also, you alluded to him recently as (paraphrasing) a small lefty. We already have one in Ellsbury. Physically, Jake, at 6'1 185 lbs. is around the height/weight Yaz played.
    Crawford is listed at 6'2'  215. He may be the game's best athlete.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    Furthermore, Crawford has shown the ability to hit lefties in the past.
    .776 OPS in '06.
    .837 OPS in '07.
    To put such a crude label on him (Moon's label) after 5 months into a 7-year deal is what isn't fair.

    Ummm....

    I called him that ("glorified platoon player" before the season began. I mentioned that TB had nobody better than .700 vs LHPs most of his years in TB. My criticism of CC vs LHPs has nothing to do with his slow start. I have said I think he will return to his career norm and help us win games. My point is: .700 vs LHPs may be good enough to start in TB, but he should be platooned here. The only reason he isn't, is that it will make Theo look foolish by only playing a $20M man start about 110 games a year. (Which amounts to a pro-rated price of $28M per 155 games).

    Everyone here know, I was saying this long before the season began.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise! : And I think you need to open the windows more often, homer. Growing up around Boston, I wouldn't even attend a game unless Yaz was in the line-up. I'm simply stating the truth. Even Yaz himself admitted if he had to do it over again, he'd have been a switch-hitter. His career OPS vs. lefties was .692. I'm aware of his playing hurt. I'm aware of the pitching eras he played in. I'm also aware of his level of concentration, which could negate a lefty-lefty match-up. I feel as strongly toward calling Crawford, who has a career OPS just 10 points lower than Yaz, a "glorified platoon hitter", as both you and I do about Yaz. I'm using this particular HOF'er to illustrate the fact that there are many good/great lefty hitters who had issues with southpaws....and weren't platoon players. Furthermore, Crawford has shown the ability to hit lefties in the past. .776 OPS in '06. .837 OPS in '07. To put such a crude label on him ( Moon's label) after 5 months into a 7-year deal is what isn't fair. Also, you alluded to him recently as (paraphrasing) a small lefty. We already have one in Ellsbury. Physically, Jake, at 6'1 185 lbs. is around the height/weight Yaz played. Crawford is listed at 6'2'  215. He may be the game's best athlete.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Neither Crawford or Lackey were worth the investment but Crawford will do just fine.  With Lackey, Theo should have saved the money for another pitcher because even Wake is better.
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    Post 1374 and you finally got your second one right!

    Good for you!
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!:
    [QUOTE]Post 1374 and you finally got your second one right! Good for you!
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Post 18k plus and you still have no life moon.  A guy who can't even "man up" when wrong and plays with harness has very little to talk about :)
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    I guess you can't even read. For years I have admitted my many mistakes on this forum. I just did it again for your pleasure and you have not admitted to even one.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!:
    [QUOTE]I guess you can't even read. For years I have admitted my many mistakes on this forum. I just did it again for your pleasure and you have not admitted to even one.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    moon I have admitted being wrong on every occasion since joing this board.  I'm not the one with the large ego, you and harness own that distiction.  I'm also not the one who needs 10 pages of facts to prove a point, or find the need to keep my own post going when it dies out, so you know your statement is way off base as does everyone else.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    I am not directing this at moon but I have told harness before if he cannot make his case in 10 posts or less he should not be resorting to 100 posts saying the same thing just to force his point. If you have ab effective argument or a valid point you shouldn't have to feel the need to pound away for days and weeks on it.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!:
    [QUOTE]I am not directing this at moon but I have told harness before if he cannot make his case in 10 posts or less he should not be resorting to 100 posts saying the same thing just to force his point. If you have ab effective argument or a valid point you shouldn't have to feel the need to pound away for days and weeks on it.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    Absolutely correct Burrito, their threads in many cases are an endless list of "partial" facts that never address your question.  harness I have found to be much worse because he talks in circles, then bashes or begins name calling when called out on it like a little child.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from S0ftl@w. Show S0ftl@w's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    Bill Hall off bench would have been a better Fenway v. Logan pinch hitter than Mac or Aviles. 18 homes last year was pretty good for limited number of PA for a season.
    Also a better pitcher than Mac.

    How about your favorite bench guy, Hermida? 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise! : And I think you need to open the windows more often, homer. Growing up around Boston, I wouldn't even attend a game unless Yaz was in the line-up. I'm simply stating the truth. Even Yaz himself admitted if he had to do it over again, he'd have been a switch-hitter. His career OPS vs. lefties was .692. I'm aware of his playing hurt. I'm aware of the pitching eras he played in. I'm also aware of his level of concentration, which could negate a lefty-lefty match-up. I feel as strongly toward calling Crawford, who has a career OPS just 10 points lower than Yaz, a "glorified platoon hitter", as both you and I do about Yaz. I'm using this particular HOF'er to illustrate the fact that there are many good/great lefty hitters who had issues with southpaws....and weren't platoon players. Furthermore, Crawford has shown the ability to hit lefties in the past. .776 OPS in '06. .837 OPS in '07. To put such a crude label on him ( Moon's label) after 5 months into a 7-year deal is what isn't fair. Also, you alluded to him recently as (paraphrasing) a small lefty. We already have one in Ellsbury. Physically, Jake, at 6'1 185 lbs. is around the height/weight Yaz played. Crawford is listed at 6'2'  215. He may be the game's best athlete.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Crawford might be listed at 6-2, I don't believe it. Ellsbury isn't 6-1 either. Those two guys can't be taller than 5-10 (CC), and Ellsbury looks 5-9. You actually believe the heights/weights on MLB players? One other thing, if you keep using the idea that today's players are different, that today's pitchers, are bigger, faster, stronger, and that the hitters are bigger, faster, stronger, that the game has changed, then judging CC today against Yaz in yester-years on OPS is kind of changing the argument. Yaz could have been a switch hitter, I realize that, he started out as a righty hitter and his DAD forced him to bat left. But CC is no Yaz, and CC does a lot of things that aren't attached to "batting" that aren't very good--playing the Monster for one, his arm for 2, and he rarely steals bases anymore for 3. I don't like the comparison, and I think you are fishing to make CC out to be better than he is, and that's because you wish he would at least perform for Sox like he did when he was Tampa Ray. 

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!:
    [QUOTE]I am not directing this at moon but I have told harness before if he cannot make his case in 10 posts or less he should not be resorting to 100 posts saying the same thing just to force his point. If you have ab effective argument or a valid point you shouldn't have to feel the need to pound away for days and weeks on it.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    I have repeated myself at times as well, but I often try new approaches and different angles to make my point.

    Most of the time I post stats or repost the same stats (maybe updated) is to counter someone's misuse of stats, cherry-picked stats, or just outright misinformation.


     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    why should any poster on this board explain themselves? who the hell cares how harness posts, or moon posts, or burrito posts, or craze posts. Enough with who's better, who's smarter, who's using facts, who's using fiction....well, the last two things do mean something. craze, you're tired of harness/moon posting facts, and they're tired of you not listening or not understanding what they are saying. I'm sure it's an equal frustration for all of you. It's a chatboard, ok? Get over yourselves. All of you.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    That goes for me, too, :-)
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    You crack me up danny. But, you are so right.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise! : moon I have admitted being wrong on every occasion since joing this board. I'm not the one with the large ego, you and harness own that distiction.  I'm also not the one who needs 10 pages of facts to prove a point, or find the need to keep my own post going when it dies out, so you know your statement is way off base as does everyone else.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    You are completely full of sh*t.
    Yaleman.
    Theo is a liar.
    Theo wanted Hanley out of town.
    Those not living in the Boston area get false feeds.

    Moon owns up to his posts. Always has.
    I've seen many a poster come and go in this place, but rare have I seen a 2-month loudmouth with zero credibility.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    I think I have only posted on game threads about 5 or 6 times since being on this site. Those threads are full od single game (small sample) judgements that bug me bigtime. Anyone who posts on those threads can affirm this. I never even went to the "Last Night's Game" thread, and yet this nutcase says I was posting on it. Not only that, he claims he "proved me wrong" on posts I never made. How whacked is that?

    This guy is edging toward my 2nd alltime Iggy.

    That would be like Derek Lowe hitting his 2nd career HR in his next start.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise! : Crawford might be listed at 6-2, I don't believe it. Ellsbury isn't 6-1 either. Those two guys can't be taller than 5-10 (CC), and Ellsbury looks 5-9. You actually believe the heights/weights on MLB players?One other thing, if you keep using the idea that today's players are different, that today's pitchers, are bigger, faster, stronger, and that the hitters are bigger, faster, stronger, that the game has changed, then judging CC today against Yaz in yester-years on OPS is kind of changing the argument. Yaz could have been a switch hitter, I realize that, he started out as a righty hitter and his DAD forced him to bat left. But CC is no Yaz, and CC does a lot of things that aren't attached to "batting" that aren't very good--playing the Monster for one, his arm for 2, and he rarely steals bases anymore for 3. I don't like the comparison, and I think you are fishing to make CC out to be better than he is, and that's because you wish he would at least perform for Sox like he did when he was Tampa Ray. 
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    I'm telling you how these players are listed. I recently saw Crawford in the Seattle game, and he's no 5' 9"/5' 10", I can tell you that. Believe what you want. Listings can be deceptive, but not by that much.

    As for comparing CC to Yaz, I was clearly only comparing OPS vs. southpaws. Nothing more. If Yaz can make the HOF with a .692 OPS, then it stands to reason that CC shouldn't be nailed for the same criteria. But I'll take Yaz over CC any day.


    To Burrito: The reason for repetitive posting - using varied slants - is obvious. Posters with closed minds need to hear the same thing over and over before they'll wake up, or, God forbid, actually admit they came up short or missed something.

    How many times have I mentioned venue? You mocked it. I showed you how it affects both hitters/pitchers alike. You finally agreed regarding pitchers. Why didn't you see that earlier?
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!

    In Response to Re: Lackey and Crawford on the rise!:
    [QUOTE]I think I have only posted on game threads about 5 or 6 times since being on this site. Those threads are full od single game (small sample) judgements that bug me bigtime. Anyone who posts on those threads can affirm this. I never even went to the "Last Night's Game" thread, and yet this nutcase says I was posting on it. Not only that, he claims he "proved me wrong" on posts I never made. How whacked is that? This guy is edging toward my 2nd alltime Iggy. That would be like Derek Lowe hitting his 2nd career HR in his next start.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Moon, I warned you about this crazy4sox loon once I exposed him for his Theo lies. He doesn't back his take when called out, so he pulls a Softy and accuses others of the same, regardless of what is proved/researched.

    He's a waste of time, and justifies the IGGY.

    Getting back to Crawford, I think it's best to compare him to good/great lefty hitters of his genre rather than try and justify a platoon by comparing him to RH platoon/bench players. If he is at the bottom rung vs. his own peers, then the "glorified platoon" statement is warranted.  But I don't think any analogy to any RH hitter isn't fair to him.
     

Share