Moderators: peeker643, swerb, pup, paulcousineau
by Erie Warrior » Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:02 pm


by Adverb Harry » Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:27 pm
by e0y2e3 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:28 pm

by Adverb Harry » Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:52 pm
by leadpipe » Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:57 pm
Adverb Harry wrote:First reactions: I like it. We get a legit big-league, proven player who still has some good years left. Better yet, it's good to be wanted...after being spurned and flat-out ignored in the past, the Indians finally got their guy, and one of the top players in the market, to boot. Sends a great message to the rest of MLB that we can bring big players in. Hopefully the start of a new perception for this team, who may have finally realized you have to spend some money and get out of your comfort zone in order to survive. Bold trades, aggressive offers...how much does Francona deserve credit for this newfound legitimacy? (Plus, looking ahead to next year's ahead free agent market, there doesn't appear to be anyone worth pursuing better than Swisher. The time to strike was now.)
Now, on the other hand, his contract (especially that vesting fifth year...not liking that) will probably be an albatross by the end, but let's worry about that in 3 years. For now, let's just enjoy this moment and what it (hopefully) signifies.
by skatingtripods » Sun Dec 23, 2012 1:19 pm
by 1Perry » Sun Dec 23, 2012 1:24 pm
by Dnthateonthepronk » Sun Dec 23, 2012 1:32 pm

by bookelly » Sun Dec 23, 2012 1:37 pm
by skatingtripods » Sun Dec 23, 2012 2:03 pm
bookelly wrote:Great. We still need 2 SP, another OF, and a DH. I'd love to seem them make a move with Perez and/or Droobs to fill those holes with young very near MLB ready guys with the idea of contending big time with the "Lindor Wave". But if they wait till the trade deadline to do so would be ok too. I'm curious to see if Francona makes an impact immediately before I blow it up.
by dpdad » Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:06 pm
by fairvis » Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:12 pm
by peeker643 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:39 pm
fairvis wrote:I think this is a good move. The Buckeye connection never hurts in popularity with the fans as well.
by pod2dawg » Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:44 pm
by bookelly » Sun Dec 23, 2012 4:02 pm
by motherscratcher » Sun Dec 23, 2012 4:15 pm
by leadpipe » Sun Dec 23, 2012 4:44 pm
motherscratcher wrote:http://deadspin.com/5970861/nick-swisher-will-take-his-goofball-show-to-cleveland
by kman_holla8 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 4:50 pm
by kman_holla8 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 5:08 pm
leadpipe wrote:motherscratcher wrote:http://deadspin.com/5970861/nick-swisher-will-take-his-goofball-show-to-cleveland
Well, this is another things that hasn't been touched upon yet - word around the campfire was there weren't too many guys in the Yanke lockerroom not fed up with schtik.
So, by about 2014, not only won't they be getting value, he'll be about on everyone's nerves.
Again, no big deal, this stuff will all play out. I'm comfortable in a prediction of Nick Swisher not being all that good in a couple years (if he even is the next couple) and you'll be hearing leaks in the lockkeroom about his hillbilly show.
Hell, he's on teammates last nerves when they're winning a hundy, can't imagine the barrel of monkees when they are losing 90.
by skatingtripods » Sun Dec 23, 2012 5:25 pm
by bookelly » Sun Dec 23, 2012 5:27 pm
by leadpipe » Sun Dec 23, 2012 5:43 pm
skatingtripods wrote:Ridiculous. Only in Cleveland do the cynics find a way to bash a very good move. Who gives a fuck if we go from 94 losses to 86 losses? That's improvement. Improve the next year and go from 86 to 80. You set yourself up for contention by getting better on a yearly basis.
This is a very flawed team. They answered a need (Bauer) without downgrading at a key position. That's a good thing. They're still not near contention. But they're on the path towards it.
As for Swisher and the Yankees, yes, a free spirited guy in a very strict clubhouse isn't going to go over well. What a big fucking newsflash. Guys can't even have long hair or facial hair as members of the Yankees. So, Swisher doesn't fit the "Yankee mystique" and bow down to its bullshit. Good for him.
The fact that he produced like he did in a clubhouse that didn't like him is my takeaway. Some guys would let that be a distraction. Swisher didn't. He went out there and hit.
by 1Perry » Sun Dec 23, 2012 5:55 pm
leadpipe wrote:
Bottom line: Not sure why I'm supposed to be excited about a decent corner outfielder falling to them, and only cause they were holding the most money.
by Kingpin74 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 7:16 pm
skatingtripods wrote:Ridiculous. Only in Cleveland do the cynics find a way to bash a very good move. Who gives a fuck if we go from 94 losses to 86 losses? That's improvement. Improve the next year and go from 86 to 80. You set yourself up for contention by getting better on a yearly basis.
This is a very flawed team. They answered a need (Bauer) without downgrading at a key position. That's a good thing. They're still not near contention. But they're on the path towards it.
As for Swisher and the Yankees, yes, a free spirited guy in a very strict clubhouse isn't going to go over well. What a big fucking newsflash. Guys can't even have long hair or facial hair as members of the Yankees. So, Swisher doesn't fit the "Yankee mystique" and bow down to its bullshit. Good for him.
The fact that he produced like he did in a clubhouse that didn't like him is my takeaway. Some guys would let that be a distraction. Swisher didn't. He went out there and hit.
by peeker643 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 7:41 pm
skatingtripods wrote:Ridiculous. Only in Cleveland do the cynics find a way to bash a very good move. Who gives a fuck if we go from 94 losses to 86 losses? That's improvement. Improve the next year and go from 86 to 80. You set yourself up for contention by getting better on a yearly basis.
by skatingtripods » Sun Dec 23, 2012 8:39 pm
by Prosecutor » Sun Dec 23, 2012 8:46 pm
by skatingtripods » Sun Dec 23, 2012 8:49 pm
bookelly wrote:Apparently Swisher can also play above average 1B. We could slot Reynolds into the DH and pick up another outfielder. What's the market on Bourne? I'd say 4/40 to 5/55. Do we have an extra $12 Mil laying around? With the Swisher signing they stand at about $65 now.
Is it that much of a stretch to go to a $68 payroll and sign Bourn? Or even $73 if we can sign a 5th starter? Or $78 if we sign a 4th?
/and yes...my math is very rough here.
by skatingtripods » Sun Dec 23, 2012 8:58 pm
by Erie Warrior » Sun Dec 23, 2012 9:10 pm


by googleeph2 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:13 pm
by leadpipe » Mon Dec 24, 2012 1:02 am
skatingtripods wrote:By WAR, Nick Swisher was the 43rd best position player in baseball (top 30% of qualified hitters). In wOBA, he was tied for 30th (top 21% of qualified hitters). 20th among qualified OF in WAR, 14th in wOBA.
Second best free agent OF available in wOBA, fourth in WAR behind Bourn, Hunter, and Hamilton.
But, yeah, he's only "decent".
Sorry, I shouldn't be using stats to prove my point. From now on, I'll make my assessments based on the three or four times I see a guy play throughout the year.
by kman_holla8 » Mon Dec 24, 2012 6:53 am
Prosecutor wrote:It looks like a good signing now, especially after watching Damon, Cunningham, and Duncan stumble around last year. The front office should never have charged major league ticket prices and trotted those guys out there. That's defrauding the fans.
The Indians now have a legitimate major league veteran at every position except third, where Chiz can't yet be described as a veteran. Their starting nine should be competitive, and their bullpen looks very good. It will all come down to the starting pitching.
by Toxicadam » Thu Dec 27, 2012 3:57 pm

by dazindiansfanuk » Thu Jan 03, 2013 9:45 pm
by bookelly » Thu Jan 03, 2013 10:14 pm
by cozmeesah » Thu Jan 03, 2013 10:39 pm
by bookelly » Fri Jan 04, 2013 5:20 am
by peeker643 » Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:02 pm
by motherscratcher » Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:35 pm
peeker643 wrote:I want me to have fun. I honestly don't give a shit of those guys hate each other and can't stand coming to the park if they win 95 games.
I'll watch bloopers if I want to laugh.
Swisher's act has worn thin everywhere he's been, by the way. Not to say it's not new and fun at first, but it's worn thin everywhere. And it's always fresher when you're winning.
by peeker643 » Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:56 pm
motherscratcher wrote:peeker643 wrote:I want me to have fun. I honestly don't give a shit of those guys hate each other and can't stand coming to the park if they win 95 games.
I'll watch bloopers if I want to laugh.
Swisher's act has worn thin everywhere he's been, by the way. Not to say it's not new and fun at first, but it's worn thin everywhere. And it's always fresher when you're winning.
How do you know that, Peek?
by cozmeesah » Fri Jan 04, 2013 3:15 pm
peeker643 wrote:I want me to have fun. I honestly don't give a shit of those guys hate each other and can't stand coming to the park if they win 95 games.
I'll watch bloopers if I want to laugh.
Swisher's act has worn thin everywhere he's been, by the way. Not to say it's not new and fun at first, but it's worn thin everywhere. And it's always fresher when you're winning.
by leadpipe » Fri Jan 04, 2013 9:58 pm
cozmeesah wrote:peeker643 wrote:I want me to have fun. I honestly don't give a shit of those guys hate each other and can't stand coming to the park if they win 95 games.
I'll watch bloopers if I want to laugh.
Swisher's act has worn thin everywhere he's been, by the way. Not to say it's not new and fun at first, but it's worn thin everywhere. And it's always fresher when you're winning.
True but teams, especially young teams, tend to play better when they stay loose & fun. Then again, like you said, it's easier to stay loose when you're winning.
by 1Perry » Fri Jan 04, 2013 11:00 pm
by skatingtripods » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:49 pm
peeker643 wrote:motherscratcher wrote:peeker643 wrote:I want me to have fun. I honestly don't give a shit of those guys hate each other and can't stand coming to the park if they win 95 games.
I'll watch bloopers if I want to laugh.
Swisher's act has worn thin everywhere he's been, by the way. Not to say it's not new and fun at first, but it's worn thin everywhere. And it's always fresher when you're winning.
How do you know that, Peek?
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/06/13/ ... overrated/
Just google "Nick Swisher Annoying" and let the search engine take over. There are players (usually anonymous, of course) pretty much everywhere he's played who say his ways get very old.
by peeker643 » Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:15 pm
skatingtripods wrote:peeker643 wrote:motherscratcher wrote:peeker643 wrote:I want me to have fun. I honestly don't give a shit of those guys hate each other and can't stand coming to the park if they win 95 games.
I'll watch bloopers if I want to laugh.
Swisher's act has worn thin everywhere he's been, by the way. Not to say it's not new and fun at first, but it's worn thin everywhere. And it's always fresher when you're winning.
How do you know that, Peek?
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/06/13/ ... overrated/
Just google "Nick Swisher Annoying" and let the search engine take over. There are players (usually anonymous, of course) pretty much everywhere he's played who say his ways get very old.
Right, because what the New York media says and what their elitist, void of personality players say about a guy should be gospel. The fact that Swisher still produced in a clubhouse that didn't like him, and tried to suffocate his personality, tells me all I need to know. Oakland wasn't exactly a fun environment when he was there either.
He's in a place where he can be himself, with a media that ate him during his press conference, and a fan base that should come to adore him. Francona dealt with a lot of personalities in Boston and did it well. He's here with guys like Pestano and Kipnis, who are a little off the wall. They're not as animated publicly the way Swisher is, but I really think he'll be a great fit in this clubhouse.
Ultimately, like you, I don't care what he's like if he has a .365 OBP and hits 25+ HR. Everybody dealt with Albert Belle because he produced. Everybody dealt with Manny because he produced. Swisher doesn't produce to that level, but do what you're supposed to do and you can run out to right field wearing a cape for all I care.
by 1Perry » Mon Jan 07, 2013 11:40 pm
by skatingtripods » Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:19 am
peeker643 wrote:FWiW, the players polled weren't all Yankees. There were guys that played with him elsewhere too. But end of the day, if he's an idiot and they win 95 games I'm fine. If he's an idiot on a losing team then he's just an idiot. He reminds me of an obnoxious buddy you love but are constantly ready to distance yourself from when he gets goofy.
by swerb » Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:48 am
Return to Cleveland Indians & MLB
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest