Aramis Ramirez or Scott Rolen?

[K-Town]

I'd be interested in hearing who says that he'll ultimately end up at first base. I've followed his career pretty closely, and haven't heard so much as a whisper about that. My understanding is that his defense is very good for a 23-year old.

 

You've followed his career closely but didn't know he wasn't a rookie last year?

 

Look, Wright is going to be very good offensively. That does not automatically make him very good defensively.

 

Semantics. Last year was his first "full" year...... thus my reference to "rookie mistakes".

 

Where did you read that he'll be moved to first base? And where did you read the negative defensive scouting reports? I'm not trying to be a jerk....... I'm just interested.

[Andy]

I'd be interested in hearing who says that he'll ultimately end up at first base. I've followed his career pretty closely, and haven't heard so much as a whisper about that. My understanding is that his defense is very good for a 23-year old.

 

You've followed his career closely but didn't know he wasn't a rookie last year?

 

Look, Wright is going to be very good offensively. That does not automatically make him very good defensively.

Tell that to Gold Glove voters.

[CubinNY]

Tell that to Gold Glove voters.

 

Good point.

 

Last spring there was a series of articles in the NY Times about Wright quoting annymous scouts about his potential. In addition, on WFAN, Mike Francessa and Chris Russo discussed Wright all the time.

 

Let me state this again so no one misunderstands my point here:

 

Wright is a special baseball player. He has a shot at a very long and very good career, but he is nowhere near an elite defensive thirdbaseman. He probaly will be better than average in the near future, but not great.

[XZero771679666304]

"Other Factors" = "I'm a Cubs fan".

 

 

:lol:

 

That is true. However, some Card fans refuse to acknowledge that Rolen's 2004 was a aberration, in probability. He is 31, exiting his prime. In his prime (and for his career overall), Rolen averaged around .275-.280, 25-30 homers. I know he was injured last year, but like Derrek Lee, Rolen is going to have to prove his best year wasn't a fluke.

 

Aramis is just entering his prime, and looks every bit of a .300-.310, 35-40 home run guy. ARam had his first .300 AVG, 30+ HR season at age 21, the same age Rolen was when he broke into the majors. Since then, Aramis has had 2 more such season (even though one was significantly shortened by injury).

 

I think when you factor in defense, Rolen is more valuable overall right now. But Ramirez is the better offensive player.

 

Having said that, David Wright may well end up being better than both of them, perhaps as soon as this year.

[K-Town]

Tell that to Gold Glove voters.

 

Good point.

 

Last spring there was a series of articles in the NY Times about Wright quoting annymous scouts about his potential. In addition, on WFAN, Mike Francessa and Chris Russo discussed Wright all the time.

 

Let me state this again so no one misunderstands my point here:

 

Wright is a special baseball player. He has a shot at a very long and very good career, but he is nowhere near an elite defensive thirdbaseman. He probaly will be better than average in the near future, but not great.

 

 

You said (or implied) that the plan was to move him to first base, because he couldn't hack it at 3rd. I simply want to know where that notion comes from. He's good defensively.

[UK1679666180]

You said (or implied) that the plan was to move him to first base, because he couldn't hack it at 3rd. I simply want to know where that notion comes from. He's good defensively.

 

Agreed, David Wright is probably another 10 years away from being considered a 1B. Unless, they get some better in the future which will be after Degaldo departs.

[CubinNY]

Tell that to Gold Glove voters.

 

Good point.

 

Last spring there was a series of articles in the NY Times about Wright quoting annymous scouts about his potential. In addition, on WFAN, Mike Francessa and Chris Russo discussed Wright all the time.

 

Let me state this again so no one misunderstands my point here:

 

Wright is a special baseball player. He has a shot at a very long and very good career, but he is nowhere near an elite defensive thirdbaseman. He probaly will be better than average in the near future, but not great.

 

 

You said (or implied) that the plan was to move him to first base, because he couldn't hack it at 3rd. I simply want to know where that notion comes from. He's good defensively.

 

I said or implied no such thing. I said his eventual future will be at first base (about the age of 30). And I've already explained where that notion comes from.

 

But let us put the opinons aside for a secondd. He is averaging an error a week at third base during the 1.5 years he played the position. How is that good? In what way shape or form is that good? If Rolen averaged an error a week would he still be good? How about Aramis?

 

I've seen him play 3rd base a lot as I watch a lot of Mets games. He is not a great third baseman defensiverly. He will get better, there is no doubt.

 

The hype around this kind of talent is always this way.

[K-Town]

I said or implied no such thing. I said his eventual future will be at first base (about the age of 30). And I've already explained where that notion comes from.

 

But let us put the opinons aside for a secondd. He is averaging an error a week at third base during the 1.5 years he played the position. How is that good? In what way shape or form is that good? If Rolen averaged an error a week would he still be good? How about Aramis?

 

I've seen him play 3rd base a lot as I watch a lot of Mets games. He is not a great third baseman defensiverly. He will get better, there is no doubt.

 

The hype around this kind of talent is always this way.

 

As has already been pointed out:

 

BP's metrics have him dead average, 100 rate and 0 FRAA

 

And that's for a 23-year old kid who is still getting better. He's gone 46 innings this year without a single error. His fielding percentage has been slightly below average over his 235 games, but his range has been above average.

 

You also initially implied that he'd only be at third base for 5 years......... and now you're saying "about age 30". You've also said that you've heard scouts and read reports that say his future is at first base. I simply want to know which reports you've read, and which scouts said that, so that I can determine how much credence to give it. That doesn't seem like a huge request.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

ARAMIS! Let's get this train back on the track.

[CubinNY]

I said or implied no such thing. I said his eventual future will be at first base (about the age of 30). And I've already explained where that notion comes from.

 

But let us put the opinons aside for a secondd. He is averaging an error a week at third base during the 1.5 years he played the position. How is that good? In what way shape or form is that good? If Rolen averaged an error a week would he still be good? How about Aramis?

 

I've seen him play 3rd base a lot as I watch a lot of Mets games. He is not a great third baseman defensiverly. He will get better, there is no doubt.

 

The hype around this kind of talent is always this way.

 

As has already been pointed out:

 

BP's metrics have him dead average, 100 rate and 0 FRAA

 

And that's for a 23-year old kid who is still getting better. He's gone 46 innings this year without a single error. His fielding percentage has been slightly below average over his 235 games, but his range has been above average.

 

You also initially implied that he'd only be at third base for 5 years......... and now you're saying "about age 30". You've also said that you've heard scouts and read reports that say his future is at first base. I simply want to know which reports you've read, and which scouts said that, so that I can determine how much credence to give it. That doesn't seem like a huge request.

 

1. Average is not good. It is average

2. He will be 24 shortly unless I forgot how to add in five years he will be around 30

3. I've already said where I read the reports and where I've heard them from. I am not going to spend an hour looking stuff up to make you happy.

4. No amount of going round and round on this topic will sway your opinon. And it seems neither will the data so keep your opinion and wait five years to have this conversation again.

[CubinNY]

ARAMIS! Let's get this train back on the track.

 

I'll take David Wright :D

[Ding Dong Johnson]

ARAMIS! Let's get this train back on the track.

 

I'll take David Wright :D

 

I thought we were discussing THIRD basemen? :lol:

[K-Town]

I said or implied no such thing. I said his eventual future will be at first base (about the age of 30). And I've already explained where that notion comes from.

 

But let us put the opinons aside for a secondd. He is averaging an error a week at third base during the 1.5 years he played the position. How is that good? In what way shape or form is that good? If Rolen averaged an error a week would he still be good? How about Aramis?

 

I've seen him play 3rd base a lot as I watch a lot of Mets games. He is not a great third baseman defensiverly. He will get better, there is no doubt.

 

The hype around this kind of talent is always this way.

 

As has already been pointed out:

 

BP's metrics have him dead average, 100 rate and 0 FRAA

 

And that's for a 23-year old kid who is still getting better. He's gone 46 innings this year without a single error. His fielding percentage has been slightly below average over his 235 games, but his range has been above average.

 

You also initially implied that he'd only be at third base for 5 years......... and now you're saying "about age 30". You've also said that you've heard scouts and read reports that say his future is at first base. I simply want to know which reports you've read, and which scouts said that, so that I can determine how much credence to give it. That doesn't seem like a huge request.

 

1. Average is not good. It is average

2. He will be 24 shortly unless I forgot how to add in five years he will be around 30

3. I've already said where I read the reports and where I've heard them from. I am not going to spend an hour looking stuff up to make you happy.

4. No amount of going round and round on this topic will sway your opinon. And it seems neither will the data so keep your opinion and wait five years to have this conversation again.

 

 

Summary: It's simply your opinion, and there are NO otehr sources that have questioned his defensive ability, and there are NO other sources who have suggested that his future is at first base.

 

Is that pretty accurate?

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Summary: It's simply your opinion, and there are NO otehr sources that have questioned his defensive ability, and there are NO other sources who have suggested that his future is at first base.

 

Is that pretty accurate?

 

Who are you, Matlock? You have an opinion, he has an opinion, this is going absolutely nowhere. Drop it already.

[K-Town]

Summary: It's simply your opinion, and there are NO otehr sources that have questioned his defensive ability, and there are NO other sources who have suggested that his future is at first base.

 

Is that pretty accurate?

 

Who are you, Matlock? You have an opinion, he has an opinion, this is going absolutely nowhere. Drop it already.

 

Who are you, the "David Wright police"?

 

He doesn't have an "opinion". He said that he knows of source (published and broadcast) who have questioned David Wright's defensive abilities, and have suggested that he'll move to first base at some point. I simply want to know who's making that claim, so that I can consider the validity of it.

 

What difference does it make to you?

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Summary: It's simply your opinion, and there are NO otehr sources that have questioned his defensive ability, and there are NO other sources who have suggested that his future is at first base.

 

Is that pretty accurate?

 

Who are you, Matlock? You have an opinion, he has an opinion, this is going absolutely nowhere. Drop it already.

 

Who are you, the "David Wright police"?

 

He doesn't have an "opinion". He said that he knows of source (published and broadcast) who have questioned David Wright's defensive abilities, and have suggested that he'll move to first base at some point. I simply want to know who's making that claim, so that I can consider the validity of it.

 

What difference does it make to you?

 

The difference it makes is that you're being unnecessarily argumentative (again). He heard on the radio in NY that some have Wright pegged for 1B in the future. What 2 craps should any of us give about your concern for the validity of those sources? I'm sure if there were questions on the sources, he probably wouldn't have put much stock in what they had to say and certainly wouldn't share THAT OPINION (yes, he does have one). My good God, if it's that important to your life, spend some time at Google searching for stories. You're bound to find some.

[K-Town]

Summary: It's simply your opinion, and there are NO otehr sources that have questioned his defensive ability, and there are NO other sources who have suggested that his future is at first base.

 

Is that pretty accurate?

 

Who are you, Matlock? You have an opinion, he has an opinion, this is going absolutely nowhere. Drop it already.

 

Who are you, the "David Wright police"?

 

He doesn't have an "opinion". He said that he knows of source (published and broadcast) who have questioned David Wright's defensive abilities, and have suggested that he'll move to first base at some point. I simply want to know who's making that claim, so that I can consider the validity of it.

 

What difference does it make to you?

 

The difference it makes is that you're being unnecessarily argumentative (again). He heard on the radio in NY that some have Wright pegged for 1B in the future. What 2 craps should any of us give about your concern for the validity of those sources? I'm sure if there were questions on the sources, he probably wouldn't have put much stock in what they had to say and certainly wouldn't share THAT OPINION (yes, he does have one). My good God, if it's that important to your life, spend some time at Google searching for stories. You're bound to find some.

 

 

I did do a Google search. Didn't find a thing, and chances are that YOU won't, either.

 

Stop getting so worked up. I have reasons for wanting to know where the information comes from. I'm not sure why it would be such a "secret". Do you act this way every time someone asks for confirmation or verification of something? Or are you the one guy on the planet who takes EVERYTHING at face value?

[Mark_R]

Summary: It's simply your opinion, and there are NO otehr sources that have questioned his defensive ability, and there are NO other sources who have suggested that his future is at first base.

 

Is that pretty accurate?

 

Who are you, Matlock? You have an opinion, he has an opinion, this is going absolutely nowhere. Drop it already.

 

Who are you, the "David Wright police"?

 

He doesn't have an "opinion". He said that he knows of source (published and broadcast) who have questioned David Wright's defensive abilities, and have suggested that he'll move to first base at some point. I simply want to know who's making that claim, so that I can consider the validity of it.

 

What difference does it make to you?

 

The difference it makes is that you're being unnecessarily argumentative (again). He heard on the radio in NY that some have Wright pegged for 1B in the future. What 2 craps should any of us give about your concern for the validity of those sources? I'm sure if there were questions on the sources, he probably wouldn't have put much stock in what they had to say and certainly wouldn't share THAT OPINION (yes, he does have one). My good God, if it's that important to your life, spend some time at Google searching for stories. You're bound to find some.

 

 

I did do a Google search. Didn't find a thing, and chances are that YOU won't, either.

 

Stop getting so worked up. I have reasons for wanting to know where the information comes from. I'm not sure why it would be such a "secret". Do you act this way every time someone asks for confirmation or verification of something? Or are you the one guy on the planet who takes EVERYTHING at face value?

 

Dude's got a good point. Probably the first time I've ever agreed with you. I feel dirty ;)

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I did do a Google search. Didn't find a thing, and chances are that YOU won't, either.

 

Stop getting so worked up. I have reasons for wanting to know where the information comes from. I'm not sure why it would be such a "secret". Do you act this way every time someone asks for confirmation or verification of something? Or are you the one guy on the planet who takes EVERYTHING at face value?

 

You have got to be kidding me. What am I taking at face value? The fact that you are being argumentative over something that is rather insignificant? The fact that I was trying to get the thread back on topic? I'm not getting worked up, I'm just wishing you would shut up.

[K-Town]

I did do a Google search. Didn't find a thing, and chances are that YOU won't, either.

 

Stop getting so worked up. I have reasons for wanting to know where the information comes from. I'm not sure why it would be such a "secret". Do you act this way every time someone asks for confirmation or verification of something? Or are you the one guy on the planet who takes EVERYTHING at face value?

 

You have got to be kidding me. What am I taking at face value? The fact that you are being argumentative over something that is rather insignificant? The fact that I was trying to get the thread back on topic? I'm not getting worked up, I'm just wishing you would shut up.

 

 

The topic was "Scott Rolen or Aramis Ramirez". Someone pointed out that they'd rather have David Wright (not off-topic, in my opinion..... just a slight diversion). I don't get to see EVERY player perform on a regular basis (Wright is one of them), so I depend heavily on what I read, and what the numbers tell me. That's why I was interested in where the information came from. I really like what I've seen of the kid, and hadn't heard this particular information.

[CubinNY]

I did do a Google search. Didn't find a thing, and chances are that YOU won't, either.

 

Stop getting so worked up. I have reasons for wanting to know where the information comes from. I'm not sure why it would be such a "secret". Do you act this way every time someone asks for confirmation or verification of something? Or are you the one guy on the planet who takes EVERYTHING at face value?

 

You have got to be kidding me. What am I taking at face value? The fact that you are being argumentative over something that is rather insignificant? The fact that I was trying to get the thread back on topic? I'm not getting worked up, I'm just wishing you would shut up.

 

 

The topic was "Scott Rolen or Aramis Ramirez". Someone pointed out that they'd rather have David Wright (not off-topic, in my opinion..... just a slight diversion). I don't get to see EVERY player perform on a regular basis (Wright is one of them), so I depend heavily on what I read, and what the numbers tell me. That's why I was interested in where the information came from. I really like what I've seen of the kid, and hadn't heard this particular information.

 

So now not only are you trolling you are calling me a liar too? That's ok. As I wrote, I am not going to spend an hour or two seaching for NY Times articles that will cost me money download to satisfy a Cardinal troll. I've read it and I've heard it. I live in NY and I subscribe to the NY times. I get the YES network and MSG, and the new network of the Mets.

 

You didn't even know that Wright wasn't a rookie last year. I have a real hard time beleiving you follow him closely. You are a troll.

 

BA data say his has a FRAA of 0

He had the most errors at his position last year

Over his short career he is averaging an error a week.

He will likely get better, but right now he is not good.

 

Those are the data. Keep your opinon if that makes you happy.

[CubinNY]

 

Dude's got a good point. Probably the first time I've ever agreed with you. I feel dirty ;)

 

No he doesn't have a point. He has nothing.

 

EDIT 1:

I just did a google search and it took me less than a minute to pull up this article. Now you have to buy it if you want to read it

 

 

David Wright gets defensive -- Newsday.com

The job of improving his defense is so arduous, and David Wright takes it so seriously, that sometimes the work brings the Mets' young third baseman to his ...

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/ ... ,0,3018274. story?coll=ny-sports-headlines&track=rss - 66k -

 

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/ny-spmets0324,0,3018274.story?coll=ny-sports-headlines&track=rss

 

Edit 2 (two minutes from the last edit)

Here is another one from the Mets webpage

http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20060312&content_id=1346509&vkey=spt2006news&fext=.jsp&c_id=nym

 

Sure doesn't look like you looked too hard there.

 

I am done with this nonsense. It really isn't worth my time.

[brinoch]

Interesting debate. Please keep it calm, folks.

[rjchapma]

I got Aramis unless this leg injury keeps up. He is better offensivley right now in his career and has gotten better defensivly. Rolen offensive numbers have gone down on the other hand and is a huge injury risk. Career wise Rolen right now, but if you were to take one of the other for a team I take Aramis because hes younger and has more of and upside then Rolen who is on a decline.

[K-Town]

 

Dude's got a good point. Probably the first time I've ever agreed with you. I feel dirty ;)

 

No he doesn't have a point. He has nothing.

 

EDIT 1:

I just did a google search and it took me less than a minute to pull up this article. Now you have to buy it if you want to read it

 

 

David Wright gets defensive -- Newsday.com

The job of improving his defense is so arduous, and David Wright takes it so seriously, that sometimes the work brings the Mets' young third baseman to his ...

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/ ... ,0,3018274. story?coll=ny-sports-headlines&track=rss - 66k -

 

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/ny-spmets0324,0,3018274.story?coll=ny-sports-headlines&track=rss

 

Edit 2 (two minutes from the last edit)

Here is another one from the Mets webpage

http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20060312&content_id=1346509&vkey=spt2006news&fext=.jsp&c_id=nym

 

Sure doesn't look like you looked too hard there.

 

I am done with this nonsense. It really isn't worth my time.

 

 

I'm not going to register to read the Newsday article, but here's what your referenced Mets page says:

 

Early last summer, while Wright's error total was steadily increasing, there was a thought, one that had a brief shelf life, that the third baseman of the present and future might be transformed into the first baseman of the future.

 

The thought died quickly, even before Wright made adjustments during the All-Star break and became a more reliable thrower and an improved overall defender. He slowed himself and less rushing meant fewer errors. Wright committed 15 errors in 233 chances (a .936 fielding percentage) before the All-Star break. After the break, he made nine in 228 chances (.961).

 

It goes on to compare him to a young Scott Rolen.

 

Pretty much a ringing endorsement for his defensive abilities, if you ask me........ and no sign of him moving to first base.