i'd like to think garner has a cut-off date in mind - give him enough rope and all. buck may be able to jump here (or someone else), but i assume ensberg is out of options...? if so, then any move they make with him would be permanent, so i'm sure they want to be absolutely certain he's fried before releasing him. because if he IS fried, they can't carry such dead weight. get burke back up here so he can be your utility INF/OF while loretta/lamb take over 3rd base.
You misread my initial post. I said age 30 was 'probably' Ozzie's breakout season not because I hadn't looked up the stats, but because you could make an argument for any season between 1982 and 1987 as a breakthrough season for Mr. Smith, as he got better every season in that stretch. Between 81 and 82, for example, he improved his OPS by more than 100 points and markedly improved his stolen base success rate and walk/strikeout ratio. He got MVP votes for the first time in 82, and made his 2nd allstar team. And yes, I know that Everett has fewer ABs at the age of 30 than Smith had before his 27th birthday, because it took AE several years to get through the minors while Ozzie basically skipped right to the majors. And I note that you chose not to discuss the substance of the rest of my post. Ozzie got better pretty much every year, steadily, while Adam has appeared to regress the last couple of seasons. I think that has to play some role in trying to predict whether Everett is on an upward career trend in terms of hitting.
As long as Ausmas continues to hit and Loretta/Lamb play 3rd base, offensively we can afford Everett playing SS. Besides defensively, we don't have another SS period.
yes, i know; apparently, that makes me an ass and a jerk. yes, i know; because, frankly, i don't really care about ozzie smith, other than the fact he, a defensive-minded SS, posted a .555 OPS in his 4th year and, as it turns out, our defensive-minded SS, roughly based on his # of ABs, is in his 4th year. so maybe we should postpone throwing AE's bat onto the foregone conclusion pile. that's it. end of my point. i realize fully that ozzie smith has nothing to do with adam everett; i realize there are probably no less than 7,651,235 reasons why the comparison isn't valid; and i realize it is indictive of absolutely nothing. but it's interesting. it's worth thinking about. it provides hope that AE might yet be a decent offensive contributor.
I've been thinking about this a bit. Just glancing around the league, here's a few vets who could be available to take the 4th OF or backup INF role, all are on 1-year contracts except Ibanez: Reggie Sanders, KC Raul Ibanez, SEA (signed $5.5M for '08) Aaron Boone, FLA Jeff Conine, Scott Hatteberg, CIN Chone Figgins, ANA Chris Gomez, BAL I would love, love, love to see Reggie Sanders take over Jason Lane's role.
No, it's not. Find two teams in the NL -- just TWO -- whose 7 and 8 hitters BOTH finished above .270 last year or both had 80 RBIs. Knock yourself out. It's completely relevant because noone in the NL can pull it off without spending $300 million (exaggeration intentional). If the team can improve and doesn't, then I would agree that it's irrelevant. But, if we're just whining and moaning about the 7 and 8 hitters and expecting everyone to hit .275 or better, with a .320 OBP and 80 RBIs, then we're living in sports-radio-call-in-show dreamland and a nice reality check is invaluable.
nice, but i'd prefer he take palmiero's spot, with burke and bruntlet taking over for ensberg and lane. semantics as to who for who; point is: i like palmiero, but have little doubt he could be significantly upgraded. sanders would be an upgrade (even though i'm still pissed at his game 1 curtain call in '05).
Agreed...but I expect them to hit over .250. I can't decide about Everett. I love him defensively and cringe when he bats. If he could hit .250 consistently then I would be happy with that. Last 3 years, he's gone from .248, .239 to .203
in '03 and '04, his first two seasons enjoying significant playing time and before breaking his wrist (i think that's what he hurt in '04), he went .265/.701 in 771 ABs. i wonder if the wrist still bothers him...?
good point. I noticed that when I checked his stats before my post. I hope he turns it around. With his defense, which is some of the best in MLB, a .250+ average is just fine by me
OK, find me a 25th man, vet, LHB, contact hitting PH. Dmitri Young would be nice, if he could actually play the field, but his ankle won't let him. Burke & Bruntlett are too redundant. If you're dropping Lane/Mo, and starting Lamb, you need power off the bench, bigtime. That's why I like Sanders.
found him: mike lamb. agreed on power, which is why i'd prefer sanders to palmiero. and burke and bruntlett are guys that can play multiple positions, run and hit with some pop. i find ensberg/lane infinitely more redudant; ensberg can only play one position, neither is appreciably fast, nor do they make consistent contact. lane's a nice defensive replacement, so i'd be OK keeping him over bruntlett, but i'd rather have someone to fill the loretta role if i were to make him my everyday starter. lamb, sanders, burke, bruntlett and quintero is a versatile, useful, i think ultimately productive bench. and sanders could spell scott.
am i remembering the '04 season incorrectly? i thought he missed the final 50-60 games after breaking his wrist..........?
Burke plays multiple positions in only the very, very loosest use of the term. And neither of the positions he can play are exactly starved for other, better, options; and Bruntlett's better at those positions; and Bruntlett & Burke's career offensive numbers are just about identical. I just don't really see a reason why you'd want both of them on the same team. And to be honest, I've just never been that impressed with Burke, much more hype over substance, imo. Agreed completely on Lane/Ensberg. One or both needs to go soon. I want Lamb getting many starts at 3rd. See if his defense can be adequate with regular PT. Phil seems to agree. So then you're left with a bench with zero LHB on it. Not good.
OK, now you are talking 1st-Puma 2nd-Biggio/Burke 3rd-Lamb/Loretta SS-Loretta/Everett C-Ausmus CF-Pence LF-Lee RF-Scott Rest of Bench-back up catcher Quintero, 4th and 5th outfielders Sanders and Palmero 12 pitchers and we are set. Just try to dump Ensbergs salery on someone and try to get a prospect for Lane. At 2nd, SS and 3rd the best men can win those positions. I would like to see Adam hit a little so Loretta can play 3rd but if he can't start hitting I would roll with a left side of Loretta and Lamb, then bring Adam in late and shift Mark to third. Also it would be better if Biggio could get the nod at 2nd with Burke as a late game replacement/pinch runner. Sanders could also challenge Scott for PT. This is getting me excited. Roy O Jason Jennings Backe (lets hope he is back) Sampson Woody Wandy and Borkowski (long guy(s) out of pen) if Backe is not back Wandy is the 5th starter Miller (left hander) White Lidge Qualls (set up) Wheeler (closer)
i think burke has some upside; some room for growth. again, we're talking about the 12th, 13th man on our roster, and i like that they have some versatility. funny, at last night's game, during the "lingo" trivia segment (if you don't know the gag - they ask 3 astros to supply asnwers to baseball terminology), the word was "ribbie." ensberg offered, "it's when a batter gets drilled in the ribs." within about .0000001 seconds, 75 of us all uttered the same, "not surprised he doesn't know what a ribbie is" joke. the clock HAS to be ticking on this guy... see, i prefer loretta starting with lamb on the pine.
