Ausmus' defensive stats up through 2007 were the best (or close to it) in the NL. He fell off in 2008, but to say he was "worthless defensively" his past "several" years in Houston is a disingenuous statement.
sounds like you've done your research. brad ausmus, adam everett....one cut, one unsigned....all of you baseball gurus who can just never seem to make us idiots understand how invaluable their d was...why aren't they on a team anymore? why didn't we keep them forever?? they never lost a step defensively. it's because the halfwits in the front office finally came around to understanding what us morons who are too stupid to pour over stats already knew for years: a great defensive player with total offensive ineptitude has NO value as an everyday starter in the major leagues.
Speak for yourself. I remember quite well. His last couple years he fell off, but not dramatically. Most notably his arm and the increased number of PB and WP. It wasn't the case at all defensively. Amazing what offense-colored glasses will do to one's memory. ...you mean like when I admitted we needed more offense? sure, ok. nope. nowhere did I say that. in fact, I mentioned once before and here again in this post that he certainly began to decline defensively. Not as ridiculously drastically as you would pretend, but a marked decline nonetheless. He was 38. Of *course* he declined. that's the thing to do when you don't have a strong argument: misrepresent the other guy's argument. No where did I intimate that his *current* value was a multiyear contract for starter's money. The context of the discussion was Ausmus's career body of work. Thanks for playing.
They both played huge parts in getting us to a World Series. Ausmus got old and is no longer able to handle a full season, and Houston would have taken Ausmus back, but he wanted to go home to California. Everett is the starting SS for the Tigers.
ah, anger issues. and you just set the record for misinterpretation and taking sentences out of context when responding to a 5 sentence post! so, no... thank you for playing!
serious question...are you some sort of insider with both the astros and the ausmus family, and ausmus' medical team? and you missed the part about why would the astros cut such an invaluable piece like everett when his defense didn't decline one iota.
Ausmus is motherf'ing OLD! He wanted to retire when leaving Houston and said he would only play out on the west coast or here. He can't play full-time at all anymore. He's gotten worse!! He never lost a step defensively? No one said that. Ausmus got worse. His last couple of years here weren't as good--especially the last one. The guy has fallen off. You kinda expect that from an old guy. With Ausmus, I think the people in the front office finally came around to the idea that players age, and as they age, their skills decline. Therefore, it might be prudent to not continue starting them. Oh wait, I think they figured that one out a long time ago--I mean, they're not starting Larry Dierker on opening day, right? That must be cause one of you smart guys told them what was up. I don't know about Everett's defensive skills at this point (he is 32--hopefully he hasn't fallen off yet), but I do know he started over 100 games for Detroit last year. He could well find himself in a starting position again next year...don't count him out
No, we just remember more than b****ing and moaning about offense after every game. keep them forever? oh hell yeah, players last forever! Let's go sign Cesar Cedeño, Jose Cruz, and Joe Morgan stat! AE had begun to develop offensively (not arrive, but develop) in either 03 or 04 before breaking his hand. He never got there, then regressed. It was right to cut him -- not when hit .250 (and half of this board was calling for his head) but when he regressed and couldn't even hit .230 anymore. Ahhh, and this is where the real issue is. You don't like being disagreed with. I'm sorry if anyone ever called you an idiot or a moron, or stupid. And for the record, I don't put a lot of stock in defensive stats. I've looked them up maybe twice in the last decade, and never for a catcher. I like to actually watch the game rather than whip out my slide rule and argue with a bunch of geeks over "vorp" or something. Agreed! It's just that Ausmus, until about 2006, did not fall in the category of "total offensive ineptitude". "below average", yes. Menoza-like? Nope. lol! "anger"? seriously, whatever came out in my tone as "anger", I apologize. was it the "thanks for playing"? That was sarcasm. Also, please show me where I misunderstood your take such that I "set the record for taking things out of context." If I misunderstood and was out in left field, I'm sorry. But honestly, if you're going to accuse someone you've never met of "anger issues", I suppose this little diddy doesn't sound "angry" at all?
Insider? His desire to relocate to SD or LA was well-publicized. no, we didn't. I answered it. But this is kinda fun:
this is what you and the angry dude are misinterpreting...i am the one saying that. everett didn't get any worse defensively at all, and, if ausmus did, i sure couldn't tell. was just as unimpressive and irrelevant defensively from about 2004 on. he didn't suddenly fall off a cliff...if he worsened, it wasn't to the point where one minute he's a great starting catcher, to, after worsening, he's now only worth making spot starts for the dodgers. he was very close to, if not the same exactly player, for the last several years of his career. and once again, with everett, why did the astros cut him? seems to be a question all of you want to avoid answering because it requires sending to hell all of your long-held ridiculous beliefs about how valuable a great defensive player is in spite of never having learned how to swing a baseball bat.
Ausmus hit .295 for the Dodgers last year in a backup role. It was the same role the Astros desired for him in 2008, but since Towles was essentially worthless, Ausmus caught more than expected. Ausmus has re-signed with the Dodgers for 2010. You, yourself said you are an idiot. I don't know if anyone will disagree with your self-assessment.
The Astros traded for Tejada, then chose to non-tender Everett. He was a huge question mark coming back from a broken leg, thus the non-tender.
They didn't cut Everett, rather they didn't offer him a contract. The Astros had just traded for an all-star SS, and Everett was coming off a broken leg. Whats hard to understand about their decision not to resign him?
Everett didn't get worse defensively. However, as msn detailed, he had been steadily improving offensively and looked close to turning the corner before breaking his hand. After the subsequent regression, it became clear that he was never going to be a decent hitter (there was once hope, believe it or not, and if you watched before he broke his hand, it really did look promising) The Astros let him go because they got Tejada. Tejada didn't want to play 3B. He said he wouldn't. Tejada, even with decreased defense at SS, represented an upgrade due to his all-around game (yes, I think we'd all agree that an all-around player is better than a specialist--either off. or def.). It wasn't worth paying Everett to be a defensive replacement, and he really wasn't worth a roster spot as a 9th inning defensive replacement because of his inability to hit. In that respect, he is interesting--he is valuable to have as a starter, but unless he's willing to take a lot less money, he's not too valuable as a reserve since the roster spot could go to a better all-around player. Then add to it that the Astros needed an offensive improvement. Their pitching was gone with Clemens and Pettite leaving, and they had to retool. They could no longer aim to win low-scoring games, and they knew it. Credit to them for not sitting back and saying "well we can't pitch so well anymore, but maybe we can still win with a crappy offense".
hmmm, so they traded a boatload of prospects for a crappy defensive ss, while choosing not to offer a fantastic defensive ss a dirt cheap contract. the only reason, of course, because he was a huge question mark coming back from a broken leg. and, naturally, you agree with all these decisions, yes? also, do you seriously want to use ausmus hitting .295 last season as part of your argument?
A boatload of crappy prospects. As of right now Luke Scott is the only one we traded worth something.
to quote eddie murphy in his role as the jew in the barbershop in "Coming to America": "ACCCCCCHHHHHAAAA!!! ACCCHHHHHAAAAA!!" thank you, sir, for finally putting this argument to bed.
2004 is when he got hurt. 2003-2004 AE was very good. Having an OPS over .700 as the best defensive shortstop in the game was very valuable.
read my post. Also, Tejada was not "crappy"...just "average". While Everett was "elite". Also, boatload of prospects is a little over the top for that platter we served them. It was alright, but I don't know that it was worth a ton to others
thanks for clearing that up. I did misunderstand. You are flat-out incorrect about this: "[ausmus] was just as unimpressive and irrelevant defensively from about 2004 on." He was *great* until 2006, with the exception of runners thrown out--of course, he had slow-delivery guys on the mound much moreso than earlier in his career, too. 2007 and 2008 he began to decline defensively. More passed balls, more wild pitches, more "backhand" attempts, etc. Dude got old. It showed. I won't blame you for missing it: I forgot about the broken leg, but they weren't going to sign him regardless. He had fallen off a cliff offensively, and they had their sights set on Tejada.
