ClutchFans - Was moving Dierker the correct move?

edc

09-12-2002, 12:12 AM

Barring a miracle (ie: a seven-game sweep of the Cards), the Astros are out of the race. A simple question:

In "your humble opinion" was the Astros organization correct in moving Dierker? Would he have made the difference this season?

I think...yes. Jimy took far too long to learn the ins-and-outs of this ballclub. By the time he, the team, and his management style were all on the same page, the team was already too far behind. They do have momentum, and next season looks to have possibilities, but this one was (in part) lost due to the change in the manager's seat.

Raven Lunatic

09-12-2002, 12:32 AM

I didn't approve of some of Jimy's moves, but I don't think he was the reason we didn't compete this season. Partly it was due to injuries, partly to players just not producing until it was too late, partly just bad luck. One thing I did like about Williams was how he handled our young pitching staff, and him not allowing them to pitch their arms off early in the season. That will be key in future seasons.

Refman

09-12-2002, 12:35 AM

Generally when there is a managerial change there is a dropoff that first year. Our dropoff hasn't been that bad. You don't make managerial decisions based on the short term. You decide whether to make a change looking toward the future...the future may be 2 to 3 years out...but it's still the future.

This team was NEVER gonna get out of the first round under Dierk...so yes it was a good move.

nWo34Life

09-12-2002, 12:52 AM

I think they should of kept Dierker where he was, and should of kept Randy Johnson. It was 2 stupid moves, and look where we are now....

Refman

09-12-2002, 12:57 AM

Originally posted by nWo34Life
I think they should of kept Dierker where he was, and should of kept Randy Johnson. It was 2 stupid moves, and look where we are now....
Randy Johnson was going to Phoenix regardless. We offered him a very competitive contract...but he was going to go where his offseason home and his family were...and that was Phoenix.

Major

09-12-2002, 12:58 AM

Dierker wasn't the problem the last several years and Jimy wasn't the problem this year. The players simply have to perform somewhere near reasonable expectations, and our guys simply didn't do it in the playoffs or early this season. Managers can't make players hit or pitch well. When all your pitchers have ERAs in the 5s or 6s, that's not the managers fault. When your star players bat 0.200, there's nothing a manager can do but keep running them out there.

Timing

09-12-2002, 01:14 AM

Originally posted by Refman
Randy Johnson was going to Phoenix regardless. We offered him a very competitive contract...but he was going to go where his offseason home and his family were...and that was Phoenix.

We offered something like 3 years/$36 million and Colangelo offered something like 4 years/$50 million. Randy and his agent probably noticed that $14 million he would be leaving on the table to sign with Houston. Honestly, it wasn't a competitive offer.

Refman

09-12-2002, 01:40 AM

Originally posted by Timing
We offered something like 3 years/$36 million and Colangelo offered something like 4 years/$50 million. Randy and his agent probably noticed that $14 million he would be leaving on the table to sign with Houston. Honestly, it wasn't a competitive offer.
$36M / 3 yrs = $12M a year
$50M / 4 years = $12.5M a year

It was a competitive offer. The difference was an extra year...which Johson, his agent and the Astros management KNEW he would renegotiate at the end of the deal.

Smokey

09-12-2002, 03:17 AM

It was the correct move for management to make after the Astros postseason meltdown. Someone needed to go (players, manager, GM, or owner), and unfortunately it was Dierker. I would have rather had Drayton pack his bags.

You all know how I feel about Drayton so I won't go into detail again, but Dierker was not to blame for the team's failure.

Timing

09-12-2002, 03:34 AM

Originally posted by Refman
$36M / 3 yrs = $12M a year
$50M / 4 years = $12.5M a year

It was a competitive offer. The difference was an extra year...which Johson, his agent and the Astros management KNEW he would renegotiate at the end of the deal.

Well now that I look it up it was 4 years $53 million.

53 - 36= $17 million

$17 meeeeellion dollars isn't chump change. Everyone would take 53 over 36 except for Ken Caminiti and the only reason he'd take less is crack related. Definitely not competitive and really just typical Drayton. Slide in there with your inferior late Kile offer to make it look like you're doing something to become a champion today.

Refman

09-12-2002, 03:53 AM

Originally posted by Timing
Well now that I look it up it was 4 years $53 million.

53 - 36= $17 million

$17 meeeeellion dollars isn't chump change. Everyone would take 53 over 36 except for Ken Caminiti and the only reason he'd take less is crack related. Definitely not competitive and really just typical Drayton. Slide in there with your inferior late Kile offer to make it look like you're doing something to become a champion today.
Wow...I've never seen somebody ignore facts quite this badly.

You act as though the 53 and the 36 are comparable. You have to look at what was being offered PER YEAR. 13.25M a year to 12M a year. Did AZ offer more? Yep...but it wasn't overpowering. the fact is that our offer was 1 YEAR less. Anybody but a deaf, mute 3 year old knows that the Unit would have saught an even bigger contract (and gotten it) after year 3 had he stayed here. When all else fails bash Drayton I guess. I'm not so willing to expect Drayton to go NEARLY as deep into debt as Colangelo did in order to assemble that team. In case you missed it they are HUNDREDS of millions of dollars in debt...like you said...not chump change.

And for the record...we made an offer to Kile. We never heard anything back. He went out of town that weekend and signed with the Rockies. We were never informed of the Rockies' offer...much less given an opportunity to match. THAT is the way it went down...and it was crappy on DK's part. Feel free to revise the chain of events so you can bash Drayton a little more. :rolleyes:

rezdawg

09-12-2002, 04:03 AM

In the short term (this year), it was not a good move. Under Dierker we would probably be a playoff team right now. Under Williams, it took 2 months before we started getting on a roll. At that point, its just an uphill battle. In the long run, this is a good move. I think we will get off to a much better start next year and that should be good enough to keep us in the race all year long. Also, Miller and Oswalt will be back along with some more experienced players in Hernandez, Munro, and Saarloos.

Elvis Costello

09-12-2002, 04:11 AM

I think the players stopped listening to Dierker and he seemed a bit burned out, as well, so I think his removal was the right thing to do. I would have preferred someone other than Jimy Williams, but the Astros weren't in contention because of the manager. They were victim of a weak left side of the infield and, as someone mentioned in this thread, a few too many of our key players taking most of the spring off.

Refman

09-12-2002, 04:14 AM

Originally posted by Elvis Costello
I think the players stopped listening to Dierker and he seemed a bit burned out, as well, so I think his removal was the right thing to do. I would have preferred someone other than Jimy Williams, but the Astros weren't in contention because of the manager. They were victim of a weak left side of the infield and, as someone mentioned in this thread, a few too many of our key players taking most of the spring off.
You bring up an excellent point. We spent the first 20 games or so with that horrible Everett and Ensberg experiment. We put ourselves in a hole from day 1.

Timing

09-12-2002, 04:28 AM

Originally posted by Refman
Wow...I've never seen somebody ignore facts quite this badly.

You act as though the 53 and the 36 are comparable. You have to look at what was being offered PER YEAR. 13.25M a year to 12M a year. Did AZ offer more? Yep...but it wasn't overpowering. the fact is that our offer was 1 YEAR less. Anybody but a deaf, mute 3 year old knows that the Unit would have saught an even bigger contract (and gotten it) after year 3 had he stayed here. When all else fails bash Drayton I guess. I'm not so willing to expect Drayton to go NEARLY as deep into debt as Colangelo did in order to assemble that team. In case you missed it they are HUNDREDS of millions of dollars in debt...like you said...not chump change.

Of course 53 and 36 are comparable, it's guaranteed money for a guy who'd be 39 years old in the last year of his contract. Does that deaf mute 3 year old know what happens to power pitchers that blow their arms out in their late thirties? Well they don't get $17 million a year. Everyone in baseball particularly at Randy's age signs with Arizona when presented with those two offers. I was embarrassed for Drayton that he initially offered $11 million/year and then REALLLLLY dug deep to offer $12 million when Arizona was already offering more per with an extra year. He was just going through the motions to make it look good.

And for the record...we made an offer to Kile. We never heard anything back. He went out of town that weekend and signed with the Rockies. We were never informed of the Rockies' offer...much less given an opportunity to match. THAT is the way it went down...and it was crappy on DK's part. Feel free to revise the chain of events so you can bash Drayton a little more.

I don't recall your chain of events. I recall Drayton playing hard ball with Kile in arbitration the year before and then offering him $6mil/season after Kile had a great year. Colorado came straight up with $8 million/season and then Drayton realizing that ole Darryl wasn't giving blue light special home town discounts upped it to $7mil/season to make it look good. Then he's shocked that Kile would actually leave over $1million/year apparently oblivious about how to treat players who are free agents.

nWo34Life

09-12-2002, 04:46 AM

Well, along w/ Randy Johnson, I really hate it that management made stupid moves to give up on former Astros players (Finley, Schilling, etc.). And now, those players are just making us look stupid by becoming All-Stars and Cy Young winners....

Why don't they ever try to keep something together that might turn out to be an actual World Series contender? We always come so close, then lose to Atlanta in the 90's, and then dump everyone so we can rebuild over and over again....

It just sucks!

Refman

09-12-2002, 04:49 AM

Originally posted by Timing
I don't recall your chain of events. I recall Drayton playing hard ball with Kile in arbitration the year before and then offering him $6mil/season after Kile had a great year. Colorado came straight up with $8 million/season and then Drayton realizing that ole Darryl wasn't giving blue light special home town discounts upped it to $7mil/season to make it look good. Then he's shocked that Kile would actually leave over $1million/year apparently oblivious about how to treat players who are free agents.
The chain of events is as I said it happened. In fact when it all went down Barry Alexrod (who represented DK and Bagwell) had a lot of explaining to do to his client (Bagwell). Nobody in the Astros org saw it coming...NOBODY. The initial offer was $6M. After DK rejected it, Drayton offered $7M (which was considered by many to be a fair offer). Then on Monday DK had signed with Colorado...out of the blue. That is what happened.

Refman

09-12-2002, 04:53 AM

Originally posted by nWo34Life
Well, along w/ Randy Johnson, I really hate it that management made stupid moves to give up on former Astros players (Finley, Schilling, etc.). And now, those players are just making us look stupid by becoming All-Stars and Cy Young winners....

Why don't they ever try to keep something together that might turn out to be an actual World Series contender? We always come so close, then lose to Atlanta in the 90's, and then dump everyone so we can rebuild over and over again....

It just sucks!
I understand your frustration. But NOBODY expected that Schilling would become the real deal. When we had Schilling the team was going nowhere. It was 1991 and rookie Jeff Bagwell and friends were playing in front of 15,000 a night and contending for third place in the division.

MadMax

09-12-2002, 10:10 AM

Originally posted by Timing

I don't recall your chain of events. I recall Drayton playing hard ball with Kile in arbitration the year before and then offering him $6mil/season after Kile had a great year. Colorado came straight up with $8 million/season and then Drayton realizing that ole Darryl wasn't giving blue light special home town discounts upped it to $7mil/season to make it look good. Then he's shocked that Kile would actually leave over $1million/year apparently oblivious about how to treat players who are free agents.

Wait a second...what owner/team doesn't talk bad about the player in arbitration?? That's the problem with arbitration in general. That point seems to be really emphasized in the Kile negotiations because he cried to the media about it. Darryl left without giving Houston much of a chance...

MadMax

09-12-2002, 10:11 AM

Originally posted by Refman
I understand your frustration. But NOBODY expected that Schilling would become the real deal. When we had Schilling the team was going nowhere. It was 1991 and rookie Jeff Bagwell and friends were playing in front of 15,000 a night and contending for third place in the division.

in fact, while he was with the astros he thought he was going to be a closer...he thought he was a bullpen guy. and so did everyone else.

Major

09-12-2002, 01:29 PM

Well, along w/ Randy Johnson, I really hate it that management made stupid moves to give up on former Astros players (Finley, Schilling, etc.). And now, those players are just making us look stupid by becoming All-Stars and Cy Young winners....

You can go through any team in baseball and find just as many "potential stars" out there that teams missed on.

Raven Lunatic

09-12-2002, 02:01 PM

Originally posted by MadMax
in fact, while he was with the astros he thought he was going to be a closer...he thought he was a bullpen guy. and so did everyone else.

Exactly, several teams outside of the Astros gave up on Schilling. Few thought he would be successful as a starter with his repertoire of pitches (basically just two). And even when he was tried out as a starter, he didn't really impress all that much. He was a late bloomer, to be sure. Same with Luis Gonzalez.

Dreamshake

09-12-2002, 05:52 PM

You act as though the 53 and the 36 are comparable. You have to look at what was being offered PER YEAR. 13.25M a year to 12M a year. Did AZ offer more? Yep...but it wasn't overpowering. the fact is that our offer was 1 YEAR less. Anybody but a deaf, mute 3 year old knows that the Unit would have saught an even bigger contract (and gotten it) after year 3 had he stayed here. When all else fails bash Drayton I guess. I'm not so willing to expect Drayton to go NEARLY as deep into debt as Colangelo did in order to assemble that team. In case you missed it they are HUNDREDS of millions of dollars in debt...like you said...not chump change.

I dont care what anyone is trying to sell me.....that is NOT a comparative offer.

A comparative offer would mean giving up more money with less years not vice versa.

99.999999999 percent of all ballplayers would of walked out on Houstons offer.

And you cant simply say, well we would of renegotiated the deal after the 3rd year. NO player is going to take that risk. 12 million a year for 3 years is not the same as 13 million a year for 4 years. Ask yourself this, which one would you of RAN to?

Buck Turgidson

09-12-2002, 06:02 PM

For the love of all that is good and holy, can we PLEASE drop the Randy Johnson thing? He was NOT, NOT, NOT, NOT going to play in Houston, or Seattle, or New York or anywhere else not in the state of Arizona. He wanted to live with his family during the season. He made this perfectly clear to the Mariners, and to the Astros before we traded for him, and this little nugget has been reported repeatedly.

bobrek

09-12-2002, 07:14 PM

Also, it's "would have" NOT "would of".

JBIIRockets

09-12-2002, 07:48 PM

Originally posted by Refman

This team was NEVER gonna get out of the first round under Dierk...so yes it was a good move.

That is a perfect answer for the question.

The goal is to win the World Series, not to get to the playoffs and lose in the first round every year. Jimy has the capibility to improve the Astros alot next year.

kidrock8

09-12-2002, 09:11 PM

Major

09-12-2002, 09:24 PM

The main reason why we aren't going to the playoffs, is because we failed to bring in any players who could help.

Hidalgo and Ward are a below average duo at LF and RF. Our lineup just sucks. We have no power at 3B, and average sticks at SS and 2B. I guess you could say that Ausmus is an above average hitting catcher. After Bagwell and Berkman, we have no offensive threats.

Even given all that, our offense is the 2nd best in the national league behind Arizona this year. The reason we're not likely to make the playoffs is that we started the season off horribly. Since about July 1st, we've been about as good as any team in the NL.

kidrock8

09-12-2002, 10:57 PM

Originally posted by Major

Even given all that, our offense is the 2nd best in the national league behind Arizona this year. The reason we're not likely to make the playoffs is that we started the season off horribly. Since about July 1st, we've been about as good as any team in the NL.

Our offense has been VERY inconsistent, despite what the stats tell you. This is reason #1320984328094 why stats don't tell the full truth. One game we score 12 runs, the next we score 2. That comes out to 7 runs per game in those 2 games, that's good right? :rolleyes:

Very rarely do we ever beat great pitchers. If we are a good team, then we must have SOME success against the best pitchers. This team was nowhere as good as people thought it would be. My prediction of 85-90 wins before the year seems to be about right. Provided that we didn't improve upon our roster from last year, when we won like 93? or so games.

kidrock8

09-12-2002, 10:59 PM

Anytime there's a thread stating anything bad about Scrooge McLane, refman is on that thread like flies around poop. In this case, flies=refman, poop=McLane.

Major

09-12-2002, 11:15 PM

Our offense has been VERY inconsistent, despite what the stats tell you. This is reason #1320984328094 why stats don't tell the full truth. One game we score 12 runs, the next we score 2. That comes out to 7 runs per game in those 2 games, that's good right?

Except this isn't true either. A simple quick measure is times we've scored 10 runs. We've done it 3 times; STL has done it 6 times (we've scored the same number of total runs as they have). If you look at the standard deviation of runs scored, I bet you'll find that the Astros have one of the more consistent offenses in baseball. This was very much a problem in previous years though when our offense wasn't balanced (all righty/power guys). This year, the mix of LH/RH, power/avg guys has really stabilized the offfense.

Very rarely do we ever beat great pitchers. If we are a good team, then we must have SOME success against the best pitchers. This team was nowhere as good as people thought it would be.

This isn't true either. We've actually struggled more with bad pitchers. We've won games started by Prior, Wood, Beckett, Astacio, Burnett, Schilling, Leiter, Millwood, etc. We've actually hit most of the "big-name" pitchers relatively well. We've been shut down by random scrubs though quite often.

Refman

09-13-2002, 12:16 AM

Originally posted by kidrock8
Anytime there's a thread stating anything bad about Scrooge McLane, refman is on that thread like flies around poop. In this case, flies=refman, poop=McLane.
When a team wins 90 games a year but doesn't advance in the playoffs (or misses them one year) it's really easy to blame that all on the owner. If we don't win the World Series each year it's because the owner didn't spend enough money. That's your argument, right? Name me a team other than the Yankees who have more postseason berths than the Astros since 1996. You can't. But the owner gets no credit for that success. Yet it's all his fault because we're not winning championships. It's really unfortunate you don't understand baseball.

EDIT: Your little analogy about me just makes you look like an idiot.

Raven Lunatic

09-13-2002, 01:53 AM

If you want to talk about poop, kidrock, perhaps you should mention the unfounded **** slinging you do towards McClane every chance you get. You always make baseless accusations of him and his methods and posters like Major and others always prove you wrong logically and without insulting. You then proceed to ignore them or insult them and wait until the next Astros thread pops up and the cycle starts all over again.

Instead of comparing other posters to insects, perhaps you could just stick to the facts like we are trying to do.

MadMax

09-13-2002, 10:07 AM

kidrock...one question you never never never answer is this:

if you think an owner deserves blame for not winning championships...

then why does that same owner not deserve some credit for winning 4 division titles in 5 years????

you've stated a few times before that the division titles are to the credit of Gerry Hunsicker...ummmm...who hired Hunsicker again?? who continues to pay the man??? just curious...

bobrek

09-13-2002, 10:58 AM

Regardless of what anyone thinks of McLane, here are some positive undisputed facts that are directly related to him:

1. The Astros are in Houston for a long time to come.

2. The Astros have one of the finest stadiums in the league.

3. The Astros are a team with players of high character.

4. The Astros are a perennial playoff contender.

5. The Astros have one of the the best player development systems and minor league systems.

6. The Astros are acknowledged to have the best baseball academy in South America that has produced a number of quality players.

7. The Astros front office is among the best in baseball.

8. He did not allow Biggio and Bagwell to leave. Some may think this is a bad thing, but McLane does reward loyalty. Down the road, those sigining will help with Berkman, Oswalt and Miller.

-------------------

The only negative thing (baseball related) that can be said about McLane is that he has not signed the high priced players in a long time. That being said, there is no tangible proof that signing or resigning high priced free agents would have propelled the Astros to any additional playoff wins. Exactly how many playoff games has Alex Rodriguez helped the Rangers win? How about McGriff and Alou for the Cubs? Griffey for the Reds? Brown and Green for the Dodgers?

Timing

09-13-2002, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by Refman
Name me a team other than the Yankees who have more postseason berths than the Astros since 1996. You can't.

Uh... the Braves have won 12 consecutive division titles. :)

MadMax

09-13-2002, 11:14 AM

Originally posted by Timing
Uh... the Braves have won 12 consecutive division titles. :)

ok...name me a team that has more postseason berths than the astros since 1996 besides atlanta and new york...who by the way play a totally different game than the rest of the league thanks to superstations and gigantic media markets

Timing

09-13-2002, 11:26 AM

Originally posted by MadMax
ok...name me a team that has more postseason berths than the astros since 1996 besides atlanta and new york...who by the way play a totally different game than the rest of the league thanks to superstations and gigantic media markets

Why 1996? Drayton bought the team in 92. If my math is right the Indians won 6 division titles from 1995 to 2001 and they actually made it out of the first round a few times. *gasp*

Raven Lunatic

09-13-2002, 11:30 AM

Originally posted by Timing
Why 1996? Drayton bought the team in 92. If my math is right the Indians won 6 division titles from 1995 to 2001 and they actually made it out of the first round a few times. *gasp*

Ah, but if we get to move the date around, why not look at the situation these teams are in now as well as post season trips? The Indians have serious financial problems. They probably won't be winning their division anytime soon. The Astros, however, are in terrific shape mostly due to their policy of having an outstanding farm system and not just throwing money at big name FAs. For that reason, the Astros will be competitive a LOT longer than the Indians have been. That, as well, can be attributed to McClane.

Timing

09-13-2002, 11:53 AM

Originally posted by Raven Lunatic
Ah, but if we get to move the date around, why not look at the situation these teams are in now as well as post season trips? The Indians have serious financial problems. They probably won't be winning their division anytime soon. The Astros, however, are in terrific shape mostly due to their policy of having an outstanding farm system and not just throwing money at big name FAs. For that reason, the Astros will be competitive a LOT longer than the Indians have been. That, as well, can be attributed to McClane.

Well let's move the date around to 1992 when Drayton bought the team then, that's fine with me. How many teams do you think have 4 playoff appearances since then and how many teams have gotten past the first round? Braves, Cardinals, Indians, Mariners, and Yankees all fit that criteria and that's without even looking to check out teams like the White Sox, Rangers, Orioles, and Dodgers.

As for the Astros being in terrific shape because of their farm system, well I dunno about that. Their farm system isn't as good as it was and the Cubs farm system is probably the best in baseball right now. The Indians took on a lot of talented players with their trades this year and that recent article from ESPN said that Drayton plans to keep payroll right about where it is now. We'll see if we're winning any divisions from here on out.

Raven Lunatic

09-13-2002, 12:46 PM

Originally posted by Timing
Well let's move the date around to 1992 when Drayton bought the team then, that's fine with me. How many teams do you think have 4 playoff appearances since then and how many teams have gotten past the first round? Braves, Cardinals, Indians, Mariners, and Yankees all fit that criteria and that's without even looking to check out teams like the White Sox, Rangers, Orioles, and Dodgers.

So...what? You have established that maybe there are 5 owners that have faired better overall than Drayton's team? Yeah, he sucks. But let's not put that into perspective and point out that the Braves, Cardinals and Yankees (and maybe the Mariners too, I'm not sure) all have much more revenue than the Astros. No, that would only weaken the point that Drayton sucks.

The Astros have had plenty of success over Drayton's tenure. It is not his fault that players that can hit lights out during the season suddenly choke in the playoffs. He puts the team on the field that will get him into the postseason, and if they suddenly have cold streaks, not much can be done about that. He may be a little more tight with money than many owners, but the Astros are still winning, and they are not having to trade off big contracts like Bagwell and Biggio just so they can stay afloat financially.

Timing

09-13-2002, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by Raven Lunatic
So...what? You have established that maybe there are 5 owners that have faired better overall than Drayton's team? Yeah, he sucks. But let's not put that into perspective and point out that the Braves, Cardinals and Yankees (and maybe the Mariners too, I'm not sure) all have much more revenue than the Astros. No, that would only weaken the point that Drayton sucks.

Hey I never said Drayton sucks. The question was posed about who's won as much and I answered it.

Raven Lunatic

09-13-2002, 02:25 PM

Originally posted by Timing

Hey I never said Drayton sucks. The question was posed about who's won as much and I answered it.

Sorry, that wasn't directed at you as much as it was at others who make it their business to bash Drayton every time something goes wrong with the Astros.

I h8 Logos

09-16-2002, 01:42 AM

he shouldve stayed, but it wasnt goinna happen; jimy williams jus doesnt seem like hes bonded with the team yet.

jus wait till next year.....UUUUUGH.....

NewYorker

09-16-2002, 03:39 AM

]

verse

09-18-2002, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by JBIIRockets
That is a perfect answer for the question.

The goal is to win the World Series, not to get to the playoffs and lose in the first round every year. Jimy has the capibility to improve the Astros alot next year.

yea, but in order to win the dance, you first have to get to the dance.

imo, the reason we consistently lose in the playoffs is because we have built this team around wannabees. 3 guys that never proven to be clutch performers are wagner, bagwell, and biggio (especially biggio). bags i can excuse because, frankly, he's rarely had any protection behind him. biggio? well, i can offer no excuses. he consistently sucks in the postseason, and - i swear - for the duration of his career has never learned to lay off the slider down and in... we should have traded biggio LOOOOOOOOOONG ago. wags? well he had a couple of dominating years, no doubt. but that flat, 98mpg fastball ain't gonna cut it against the upper echelon of MLB hitters. and that's what you face in the crunch time.

as for dierk, i thought it was a terrible move. dierk consistently got us to the playoffs (where his players..ahem..biggio..ahem..bagwell) would consistently forget how to put up more than 2 runs per game.

verse

09-18-2002, 12:35 PM

oh, and for the record, i do think that berkman, oswalt and miller are absolute STUDS. these guys, imo, have the ability to take the team to the next level, as long as mcclane secures some support for them...namely another good, young power hitting 3rd baseman, a consistent leadoff man/centerfielder, and another middle reliever.

MadMax

09-18-2002, 12:38 PM

Originally posted by verse
bags i can excuse because, frankly, he's rarely had any protection behind him.

i disagree with a lot of what you said...but most of my disagreements with your argument involve me supporting Astros...here i disagree....alou and caminiti should have been enough protection...he didn't go hitless because of the guy behind him...lesser players have hit better in the playoffs with lesser guys hitting behind them. and i say that as a HUGE bagwell fan!!!

i disagree with trading biggio a long time ago...biggio did hit well in the clutch during the regular season...it just didn't translate in the playoffs...you have no way of knowing that trend will continue, so you base your personnel moves largely around how guys perform over the 162 game season...and Biggio and Wagner both did quite well in those seasons. as you said, "in order to win the dance, you first have to get to the dance." these guys got us to the dance 4 times in 5 years...hard to argue sticking with your guns.

wait...so dierk isn't to blame for them not hitting in the playoffs..but he should get credit for them being there??? huh??? dierk made bad decisions IN the playoffs that didn't help. the most important AB of the season last year was left to Chris Truby, who Dierker used as a pinch hitter in that AB (game 2 of the playoff game we lost 1-0). Dierk completely dropped the ball, in my opinion, in not utilizing Vizcaino in the playoffs...particularly since we got him under the guise of acquiring his playoff experience...instead he started Lugo in game 1 and game 2, who proceeded to boot away crucial plays.

no coach in baseball deserves all the blame for a loss or all the praise for a win...but i feel the astros were certainly justified in cutting ties with Larry...and I don't hear lots of rumblings around MLB of teams trying to hire Larry now, either.

verse

09-18-2002, 12:58 PM

alou and caminiti should have been enough protection...he didn't go hitless because of the guy behind him...lesser players have hit better in the playoffs with lesser guys hitting behind them. and i say that as a HUGE bagwell fan!!!

hmm. you're probably right about that. alou and cammy probably should have been enough.

i disagree with trading biggio a long time ago...biggio did hit well in the clutch during the regular season...it just didn't translate in the playoffs...you have no way of knowing that trend will continue, so you base your personnel moves largely around how guys perform over the 162 game season...and Biggio and Wagner both did quite well in those seasons.

i disagree. i don't believe he hit well in the clutch during the regular season either (biggio). again, i have no stats or tapes in front of me, but i swear it seems that if it's a big game (regular or postseason), craig disappears in the clutch ABs. sure, he'll bang out a game winning double against the expos or reds or marlins (the run of the mill average to below average teams), but against the upper echelon teams? poof. gone.

same for wags...recently.

really, i don't dislike biggio. in fact, i love his hard nosed play. i just think that his trade value was at it's absolute peak about 2 years ago. this was also about the time that i accepted that he and bags would never be able to take us past the 1st round. so, i figure you might as well move one of them while their value is high enough to get a comparable piece in return. and, well, i'd rather keep the cornerstone at first than biggio.

wait...so dierk isn't to blame for them not hitting in the playoffs..but he should get credit for them being there??? huh??? dierk made bad decisions IN the playoffs that didn't help. the most important AB of the season last year was left to Chris Truby, who Dierker used as a pinch hitter in that AB (game 2 of the playoff game we lost 1-0). Dierk completely dropped the ball, in my opinion, in not utilizing Vizcaino in the playoffs...particularly since we got him under the guise of acquiring his playoff experience...instead he started Lugo in game 1 and game 2, who proceeded to boot away crucial plays.

what i was trying to say (but obviously didn't ;) ) was that i think dierk did as much as he could with what he was given (except for the truby AB...you're right...he blew that one horribly!) he got them there.

at some point, though, you're players have to "step up their game". imo, the playoffs are that time. it's that time where the jim lehritzes and mariano riveras step their games up. IOW, i think (and i know this isn't a popular belief) that coaching - in the playoffs - is largely overrated. i think they have the ability to futz up a game (ahem...truby) but other than that they just put the pieces into motion and let them battle it out. whoever steps their game up (kevin brown v hou) or down (biggio v anyteam) is who's gonna determine the winner.

MadMax

09-18-2002, 01:04 PM

Originally posted by verse
hmm. you're probably right about that. alou and cammy probably should have been enough.

i disagree. i don't believe he hit well in the clutch during the regular season either (biggio). again, i have no stats or tapes in front of me, but i swear it seems that if it's a big game (regular or postseason), craig disappears in the clutch ABs. sure, he'll bang out a game winning double against the expos or reds or marlins (the run of the mill average to below average teams), but against the upper echelon teams? poof. gone.

same for wags...recently.

really, i don't dislike biggio. in fact, i love his hard nosed play. i just think that his trade value was at it's absolute peak about 2 years ago. this was also about the time that i accepted that he and bags would never be able to take us past the 1st round. so, i figure you might as well move one of them while their value is high enough to get a comparable piece in return. and, well, i'd rather keep the cornerstone at first than biggio.

what i was trying to say (but obviously didn't ;) ) was that i think dierk did as much as he could with what he was given (except for the truby AB...you're right...he blew that one horribly!) he got them there.

at some point, though, you're players have to "step up their game". imo, the playoffs are that time. it's that time where the jim lehritzes and mariano riveras step their games up. IOW, i think (and i know this isn't a popular belief) that coaching - in the playoffs - is largely overrated. i think they have the ability to futz up a game (ahem...truby) but other than that they just put the pieces into motion and let them battle it out. whoever steps their game up (kevin brown v hou) or down (biggio v anyteam) is who's gonna determine the winner.

1. biggio was the best clutch hitter in the regular season last year in the NL, as I remember it...i dont have the stats, but i remember reading that

2. agreed...the guys needed to step up...i just don't know that you trade perennial all stars though because they didn't perform in the playoffs in the past...i think the assumption is that they will perform in the future...Jim Leyritz doesn't get a team to the playoffs, no matter how dramatic his playoff HR's have been...he's a pinch hitter...Jeff Bagwell, Craig Biggio & Billy Wagner DO and DID get their team to the playoffs. i wholeheartedly agree...i just don't think the solution is all that easy to make, despite being seemingly easier with hindsight.