Text Size

Cleveland Indians & MLB

B-List = Awesome

Talk Tribe, talk baseball in this forum.

Moderators: peeker643, swerb, pup, paulcousineau

Re: self fulfilling prophecy?

Unread postby Steve Buffum » Wed Apr 12, 2006 3:27 pm

ACrank wrote:Vazquez won't hit like Espinosa.

Um ... dude ... the problem is that he hits EXACTLY like Alvaro Espinoza. Which is to say, none. (Career line: .254 .279 .331)
ACrank wrote:Isn't it great that the only concerns on the team seem to be the #24 and #25 players on the roster (Vazquez and Hollandsworth)?

Well put! Although as long as Graves is #23, I get to complain about that, too. ;-)
User avatar
Steve Buffum
Prose Flayer
 
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 12:32 am
Location: Austin TX
Favorite Player: Withheld
Least Favorite Player: David Huff

Unread postby ACrank » Wed Apr 12, 2006 5:30 pm

Lebowski wrote:Crank:
1) Vazquez will adjust better to not playing on a regular basis.


Who cares how he adjusts? He's still Ramon Vazquez.

If you implying that Phillips would have caused problems in the clubhouse, well, I guess that is the great unknown. Dude had attitude problems in the past, but I wouldn't call him Milton Bradley. From his quotes after he was told he didnt make the team, he really seemed like he would have done anything to make the team.


Phillips should have felt that way a couple of years ago.
2) Vazquez will make the routine plays.


Hmm...if I cede that RV will make the routine plays, will you cede that Phillips would have made the more difficult plays? Will you cede that Phillips has better range and is better at turning the DP?

Or do you think Vazquez is the better overall 2B? (I don't...but maybe this can partially explain why you support the move)


I don't really care if Phillips can make the highlight reel/web gem plays if he can't make the routine plays.
3) Vazquez knows what it takes to be a major league utility infielder.


Umm...so do I. I know what it takes as well...want me to suit up?

He's a stiff...why value the all important "knowledge of what it takes" over the somehow underrated "talent"?


Because all Phillips' talent seems to be is the dreaded potential, and i don't believe an utility infielder spot on a winning/contending team is where you want "potential".

Point is...even if we agree to disagree about some things...wouldn't we find a common ground in saying that Ramon Vasquez-utility INF in 06 vs. Brandon Phillips-utility INF in 06 is basically a wash? I think Phillips would have proven better for 06, you think Vasquez...but can we agree that neither would have been a marked improvement over the other?


Looking at talent, alone, perhaps. I actually think, for the 2006 Cleveland indians, at least, and perhaps for MLB teams in general: RV > BP I expect Vazquez to get a limited number of ABs, and from that and from what little i know about Phillips i still do not think Phillips would have been a wise choice for that spot as i do not believe he could have handled the lack of play of the position well.

And if we reach that common ground....how in the wild world of sports wouldn't BP's upside swing the vote in his favor for you? If RV in 06 = BP in 06...wouldn;t the next logical step be to look to see what each player offers beyond 2006?


Once again - its the dreaded word upside. & as i have stated before:

1) i do not think the utility infielder spot on a contending team is one where upside should be an issue

2) i am not convinced that Phillips would have developed anymore due to the lack of PT then he would have in the previous how many years?

Beyond 2006? You can't convince me Phillips would have developed, so this is a lost argument.

And who offers more value to the Cleveland Indians beyond 06? (Hint: Not Ramon Vazquez)
[b]

Hint: I could care less for beyond 2006 at this point in time. Now make no doubt, i have been as big a proponent of the rebuild as anyone, and i also know 2nd base is a major problem for the future of the Indians. But here is another hint: If Phillips had made the team he was not going to be the long term solution to second anyhow.

Now as i have said before, if this were 2004 then i would want Phillips over Vazquez - because the team would still be rebuilding and Phillips might end up earning regular playing time at any number of positions. But this is 2006, the Indians are coming off of a 93 win season, and its time to forget about potential.

But what i still can't figure out, and no one can give me a solid answer to, is why do you who wanted Phillips on the team think he could have developed in the limited number of ABs an utility infielder figures to get when he wasn't developing in all the years before this?

Guess we have to call this a draw. Those of you who wanted Phillips believe that he would have developed in limited playing time in the bigs this year. I believe otherwise. Phillips past history (2003 - and even that month of batting practice last year) are in my favor.
User avatar
ACrank
Admitted Apologist
 
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 9:25 pm
Location: in the stands at a ballgame somwhere

Unread postby Lebowski » Wed Apr 12, 2006 6:19 pm

Crank:
Because all Phillips' talent seems to be is the dreaded potential, and i don't believe an utility infielder spot on a winning/contending team is where you want "potential".


Again...a talented player with potential versus a bad player with experience...why choose the latter?

I actually think, for the 2006 Cleveland indians, at least, and perhaps for MLB teams in general: RV > BP


Well I disagree. Maybe this is the root of our problem.

But you never addressed my point about any difference between the two for this season is minimal...and thus, BP's potential should have given him the edge for the job.

Care speak to this? I said:

Point is...even if we agree to disagree about some things...wouldn't we find a common ground in saying that Ramon Vasquez-utility INF in 06 vs. Brandon Phillips-utility INF in 06 is basically a wash? I think Phillips would have proven better for 06, you think Vasquez...but can we agree that neither would have been a marked improvement over the other?

And if we reach that common ground....how in the wild world of sports wouldn't BP's upside swing the vote in his favor for you? If RV in 06 = BP in 06...wouldn;t the next logical step be to look to see what each player offers beyond 2006?


Or was this supposed to?
I could care less for beyond 2006 at this point in time.


Thank God Shapiro doesn't think this way.
- Lebowski
Lebowski
The Dude
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 1:53 pm
Location: Youngstown, OH
Favorite Player: Z
Least Favorite Player: BE

Unread postby ACrank » Wed Apr 12, 2006 6:30 pm

Again...a talented player with potential versus a bad player with experience...why choose the latter?


Simple. Phillips talent has yet to materialize, and with all the time invested in him it is reasonable to believe, at least as far as the Indians go, it will never materialize.

Also, as i have said a few times, i do not think the utility infield spot on a contending team is one where "potential" should come into play.


Well I disagree. Maybe this is the root of our problem.


It probably is, but i am not sure i am making myself clear enough on this. All things equal, i probably would want Phillips over Vazquez. But all things aren't equal - this is a 93 win season we are coming off of - and this is a team that is supposed to go deep into the season contending for a playoff spot. I just can't see Phillips fitting into that equation at all.

On the other hand - if i were a Reds fan of couse i would want Phillips over Vazquez - for the same reason i said that if this were 2 years ago i would want Phillips over Vazquez.


Thank God Shapiro doesn't think this way.


But you see, he does. And having Vazquez, Hollandsworth and Graves on the team is what shows that to me.

This team is built to win this year. But the core is going to last longer than this year - and the next wave of players will take the team further in coming years.

So why pick Vazquez over Phillips? Well besides to give us the chance to waste a lot of time and bandwidth, its because for a contending team Vazquez makes better sence, and because it was determined that Phillips was not in the long term plans of the Indians.
User avatar
ACrank
Admitted Apologist
 
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 9:25 pm
Location: in the stands at a ballgame somwhere

Unread postby Lebowski » Wed Apr 12, 2006 6:54 pm

Point is...even if we agree to disagree about some things...wouldn't we find a common ground in saying that Ramon Vasquez-utility INF in 06 vs. Brandon Phillips-utility INF in 06 is basically a wash? I think Phillips would have proven better for 06, you think Vasquez...but can we agree that neither would have been a marked improvement over the other?

And if we reach that common ground....how in the wild world of sports wouldn't BP's upside swing the vote in his favor for you? If RV in 06 = BP in 06...wouldn;t the next logical step be to look to see what each player offers beyond 2006?
- Lebowski
Lebowski
The Dude
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 1:53 pm
Location: Youngstown, OH
Favorite Player: Z
Least Favorite Player: BE

Ok i guess you didn't read the other times when i answered

Unread postby ACrank » Wed Apr 12, 2006 7:13 pm

those - or you didn't want to understand what i said. Let me try again:


Point is...even if we agree to disagree about some things...wouldn't we find a common ground in saying that Ramon Vasquez-utility INF in 06 vs. Brandon Phillips-utility INF in 06 is basically a wash? I think Phillips would have proven better for 06, you think Vasquez...but can we agree that neither would have been a marked improvement over the other?


I have said a few times now, that i think Vazquez > Phillips for the 2006 Cleveland Indians. I think thats part of the issue - you want to look at them just as individual players. And as individual players you are correct. But based on the needs of the team, you aren't correct.

Likewise - for the 06 Reds - Phillips > Vazquez.

But if you are looking at it just comparing one player to the other, than you are correct.

And if we reach that common ground....how in the wild world of sports wouldn't BP's upside swing the vote in his favor for you? If RV in 06 = BP in 06...wouldn;t the next logical step be to look to see what each player offers beyond 2006?


No, not really. Because the Indians in 05 won 93 games - they have to be concerned about this years team (at least up uintil it damages the team long term). Plus you have to beleive that they have seen enough of Phillips over the past four years to realize Phillips is not the long term solution at second.

BP's upside means nothing to me - its meant less every year when his upside stayed at upside and was never converted into actual production against Major League pitching. I just cannot see where keeping him one more day/week/month/year would do anymore than what the past four years failed to do.

Now, did i answer your questions clearly enough?
User avatar
ACrank
Admitted Apologist
 
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 9:25 pm
Location: in the stands at a ballgame somwhere

Unread postby Guest » Wed Apr 12, 2006 8:14 pm

God has his thoughts.
Guest
 

Unread postby swerb » Wed Apr 12, 2006 9:09 pm

GodHatesClevelandSports wrote:God has his thoughts.

Dude, that blog is hysterical.

I'm gonna link it on my front page.
User avatar
swerb
JoBu's bee-yotch
 
Posts: 17918
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:04 pm
Location: Twinsburg, OH
Favorite Player: Mango Hab
Least Favorite Player: Bob LaMonte

Unread postby Lebowski » Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:03 am

Crank:
Now, did i answer your questions clearly enough?


Not really.

I think the issue we have is that we view RV in the utility role vs BP in the utility role quite differently. You believe that RV adds significant value to the 06 Indians over BP. I don't. And without that common ground from which we could stand, I don't think we're gonna get any further in this discussion. Spinning tires 'n shit.

Good discussion tho...I was wondering when these boards would start up with lively discussion...I just didn't think a utility infielder would be the spark :wink:

Go Tribe.
- Lebowski
Lebowski
The Dude
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 1:53 pm
Location: Youngstown, OH
Favorite Player: Z
Least Favorite Player: BE

LOL - you just wanted me to agree with you :)

Unread postby ACrank » Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:20 am

i do agree, it was a good discussion - valid points made on both sides...guess we just have to agree to disagree
User avatar
ACrank
Admitted Apologist
 
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 9:25 pm
Location: in the stands at a ballgame somwhere

Unread postby consigliere » Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:34 am

Oh geeze, can we all sing Kumbaya now? :wink:
Indians Prospect Insider: http://www.indiansprospectinsider.com/
Image
User avatar
consigliere
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:22 am
Location: Painesville Twp, OH
Favorite Player: Jeff Stevens
Least Favorite Player: Carl Willis

Unread postby Steve Buffum » Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:46 am

Consigliere wrote:Oh geeze, can we all sing Kumbaya now? :wink:

Why? Has Graves been released?
User avatar
Steve Buffum
Prose Flayer
 
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 12:32 am
Location: Austin TX
Favorite Player: Withheld
Least Favorite Player: David Huff

Unread postby consigliere » Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:52 am

Steve Buffum wrote:
Consigliere wrote:Oh geeze, can we all sing Kumbaya now? :wink:

Why? Has Graves been released?


When Graves gets released, I have Kool and the Gang ready to go....

"Celebrate good times, come on! (Let's celebrate)"
Indians Prospect Insider: http://www.indiansprospectinsider.com/
Image
User avatar
consigliere
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:22 am
Location: Painesville Twp, OH
Favorite Player: Jeff Stevens
Least Favorite Player: Carl Willis

Unread postby Lebowski » Thu Apr 13, 2006 11:02 am

Fuck getting released...I'll start singing if the crazy bastard cuts his hair!
- Lebowski
Lebowski
The Dude
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 1:53 pm
Location: Youngstown, OH
Favorite Player: Z
Least Favorite Player: BE

Previous

Return to Cleveland Indians & MLB

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron

Who is online

In total there are 2 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 181 on Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests