Thoughts on Adrian Beltre?

[Dipre]

lol

 

You do know "text speak" refers to cell phone messaging right?

[Emmz]

lol

 

go fuk urslf k??

[Emmz]

You do know "text speak" refers to cell phone messaging right?

 

Lol, you're a fagstick=Acceptable.

 

lol ur gay lol haha=absolutely not.

[rhet]

Beltre has 67 plate appearances at Fenway. Please stop.

 

Let's put it this way.... if his first 67 plate appearances in Fenway as a Red Sox are a repeat of those 67 plate appearances, they'll be running him out of town on a rail.

[callandor1000]

Beltre has 67 plate appearances at Fenway. Please stop.

 

No. As a matter of fact, if you go through all of the AL East parks, Beltre leaves a lot to be desired in those venues. Lowell is considerably better in most of them.

 

Really, none of us have a damn clue until the season is over as to whether or not this was a good call, but I just can't stop thinking about what a waste Edgar was.

[callandor1000]

Also, why is "text speak" being talked about as if it has ever been or ever will be an acceptable form of communication? I'm far from a grammar nazi (partially because my grammar is nothing special and in need of at least a tiny bit of help ) but really, it should be unacceptable to speak in so called "text speak" in any situation, including when using your cell phone. It takes twice the effort to type things wrong as it does to use correct spelling and punctuation.

[Emmz]

No. As a matter of fact, if you go through all of the AL East parks, Beltre leaves a lot to be desired in those venues. Lowell is considerably better in most of them.

 

Really, none of us have a damn clue until the season is over as to whether or not this was a good call, but I just can't stop thinking about what a waste Edgar was.

 

Edgar sucked on defense, for one.

 

And how many PA's did he have against any of those AL East teams?

 

Stick to logic, it's a park friendly to hitters, he's a gold glove defender, he's capable of hitting 25 HR's at Safeco. Wouldn't it be a safe bet to say he might be able to put up Lowell-esque offensive stats, with slightly better power, and vastly superior defense?

[ORS]

Let's put it this way.... if his first 67 plate appearances in Fenway as a Red Sox are a repeat of those 67 plate appearances' date=' they'll be running him out of town on a rail.[/quote']

This is probably true. That said, it still falls short of explaining why those 67 PA's should be considered a credible gauge of expectations for his performance in 2010, which is pretty much the main topic of discussion.

[Emmz]

Also' date=' why is "text speak" being talked about as if it has ever been or ever will be an acceptable form of communication? I'm far from a grammar nazi (partially because my grammar is nothing special and in need of at least a tiny bit of help ) but really, it should be unacceptable to speak in so called "text speak" in any situation, including when using your cell phone. It takes twice the effort to type things wrong as it does to use correct spelling and punctuation.[/quote']

 

I agree, but I don't use text speak at all, not even in text messages. Hell, I capitalize and punctuate in text messages >

 

Anyways, the whole "ur" and "u" and "sux" and s*** like that is absolutely ridiculous. It makes you look retarded, and it's not that effing hard to hit a few extra buttons. Sweet Jesus, have some self respect, and it's even worse that you're willing to do it at a forum, where the intent is at least somewhat intelligent discussion.

[Dipre]

Let's put it this way.... if his first 67 plate appearances in Fenway as a Red Sox are a repeat of those 67 plate appearances' date=' they'll be running him out of town on a rail.[/quote']

 

Quite humorous.

 

No. As a matter of fact, if you go through all of the AL East parks, Beltre leaves a lot to be desired in those venues. Lowell is considerably better in most of them.

 

Really, none of us have a damn clue until the season is over as to whether or not this was a good call, but I just can't stop thinking about what a waste Edgar was.

 

Really?

 

Fenway Park: 67 PA's.

 

Camden Yards: 92 PA's.

 

YS/NYS: 76 PA's.

 

Tropicana Field: 70 PA's.

 

Rogers Centre: 119 PA's.

[Dipre]

This is probably true. That said' date=' it still falls short of explaining why those 67 PA's should be considered a credible gauge of expectations for his performance in 2010, which is pretty much the main topic of discussion.[/quote']

 

Because rhet said so?

 

Never mind his career averages.

 

Never mind the statistics.

 

It's obvious that those 67 PA's should be the benchmark for the rest of Beltre's career.

[rhet]

This is probably true. That said' date=' it still falls short of explaining why those 67 PA's should be considered a credible gauge of expectations for his performance in 2010, which is pretty much the main topic of discussion.[/quote']

 

Well I think people are overrating him here, but even I wouldn't suggest he will fail that badly. He's a major league player and I expect a reasonable offensive year from him. Anything over .325 OBP is a bonus, especially if he's in the 8-hole.

[callandor1000]

Edgar sucked on defense, for one.

 

And how many PA's did he have against any of those AL East teams?

 

Stick to logic, it's a park friendly to hitters, he's a gold glove defender, he's capable of hitting 25 HR's at Safeco. Wouldn't it be a safe bet to say he might be able to put up Lowell-esque offensive stats, with slightly better power, and vastly superior defense?

 

85 at Camden and I'm just gonna use everyone's favorite stat, OPS. .720

Tropicana 65 Ops. .475

Rogers Centre 108 OPS .792

With 9 HR's between the three stadiums.

Don't think he played at the New Yankee Stadium yet.

 

I think we'll be booing his defense and if he gets double digit HR's we'll be lucky. And he won't hit when it matters.

[CoachC.]

This may be dumb to ask at this point but are the Sox now in the luxury tax with the signing of Beltre?

[italstallianion]

This may be dumb to ask at this point but are the Sox now in the luxury tax with the signing of Beltre?

 

I believe so, but if we move Lowell we'd move back under it, however I haven't calculated the exact figures yet.

[Dipre]

85 at Camden and I'm just gonna use everyone's favorite stat, OPS. .720

Tropicana 65 Ops. .475

Rogers Centre 108 OPS .792

With 9 HR's between the three stadiums.

Don't think he played at the New Yankee Stadium yet.

 

I think we'll be booing his defense and if he gets double digit HR's we'll be lucky. And he won't hit when it matters.

 

So even though he averages over 20 HR's (24 HR's) per year over his major league career, now he'll magically not be able to hit over nine, in a much easier stadium for RHH. Also, he won't "hit when it matters"? That's pretty humorous.

[Emmz]

This is a lot of pessimistic guessing, really. There's really not much logic at all to that argument. Use career stats, rather than several small sample sizes to make your case.

 

That being said, I think a Lowell type offensive year is going to happen, with the defense being awesome.

 

Seriously, give those small sample sizes a rest.

[callandor1000]

So even though he averages over 20 HR's (24 HR's) per year over his major league career' date=' now he'll magically not be able to hit over nine, in a much easier stadium for RHH. Also, he won't "hit when it matters"? That's pretty humorous.[/quote']

 

See, I think you're twisting what I'm saying and you tend to do that a lot to people. I go days without posting to try and see the trend of this site and the trend tends to be that you're king s*** and everyone else is rat s***, according to you.

 

My flat out opinion of the man after having seen interviews, watching highlights and reading articles of him is that he's going to tank. I'm obviously no expert, so my opinion should mean little to you, but I don't understand why I can't give it. Oh, wait, that's right. I'm rat s***. My bad. *bows humbly*

 

As far as the numbers I'm using, all I'm saying is the number's he's put up leave something to be desired. Maybe he will fulfill that desire. I'm not saying those numbers mean he will be bad. The numbers do mean we should wait and see before we hail him as our savior at 3B. There is obviously a reason we didn't offer him a longer contract.

[Dipre]

See, I think you're twisting what I'm saying and you tend to do that a lot to people. I go days without posting to try and see the trend of this site and the trend tends to be that you're king s*** and everyone else is rat s***, according to you.

 

My flat out opinion of the man after having seen interviews, watching highlights and reading articles of him is that he's going to tank. I'm obviously no expert, so my opinion should mean little to you, but I don't understand why I can't give it. Oh, wait, that's right. I'm rat s***. My bad. *bows humbly*

 

As far as the numbers I'm using, all I'm saying is the number's he's put up leave something to be desired. Maybe he will fulfill that desire. I'm not saying those numbers mean he will be bad. The numbers do mean we should wait and see before we hail him as our savior at 3B. There is obviously a reason we didn't offer him a longer contract.

 

This is a massive cop-out. As far as the "twisting words around" i'm using exactly what you said.

 

You said we'd be lucky if he hit double digit homers. I say he averages 24 over his career, so that's absolutely ridiculous. I also say using small sample sizes in stadiums he's barely played in is not a good indicator of future performance, and a pretty illogical way to see things.

 

I called you out on both accounts.

 

You cop out.

 

There is no trend.

 

When you post an opinion at a Red Sox discussion board, expect it to be challenged. There was no disrespect in my words, but a merely stating of the facts.

 

You're the one twisting words here, my good man.

[callandor1000]

This is a massive cop-out. As far as the "twisting words around" i'm using exactly what you said.

 

You said we'd be lucky if he hit double digit homers. I say he averages 24 over his career, so that's absolutely ridiculous. I also say using small sample sizes in stadiums he's barely played in is not a good indicator of future performance, and a pretty illogical way to see things.

 

I called you out on both accounts.

 

You cop out.

 

There is no trend.

 

When you post an opinion at a Red Sox discussion board, expect it to be challenged. There was no disrespect in my words, but a merely stating of the facts.

 

You're the one twisting words here, my good man.

 

I'm a man of many opinions on every subject I can think of. I don't always state them clearly, which I apologize for. I warned awhile ago that I'm a messy poster and this is what I meant. From now on, I'll post my personal opinion (which is very rarely substantiated by numbers and often times if it does involve numbers its just a weird number that only means anything to me) and then I'll post my opinion based on numbers. They often vary greatly.

 

My personal, gut opinion is that this will be a bust. He'll do just as I say. He'll even likely spend a good bit of time hurt.

 

My numbers opinion is he'll bat .395-.305, 32 HR, 95 RBI, 15 of 22 stealing bases, with a .355 OBP and a mid .800 OPS.

 

Sorry for the inconvenience, and I'll be sure for now on to post both of my opinions from here on out. I always have two opinions on things, its just I tend to favor my personal gut opinion. I'm correct more far more often when I go with my initial instinct and opinion.

[Dipre]

I'm a man of many opinions on every subject I can think of. I don't always state them clearly, which I apologize for. I warned awhile ago that I'm a messy poster and this is what I meant. From now on, I'll post my personal opinion (which is very rarely substantiated by numbers and often times if it does involve numbers its just a weird number that only means anything to me) and then I'll post my opinion based on numbers. They often vary greatly.

 

My personal, gut opinion is that this will be a bust. He'll do just as I say. He'll even likely spend a good bit of time hurt.

 

My numbers opinion is he'll bat .395-.305, 32 HR, 95 RBI, 15 of 22 stealing bases, with a .355 OBP and a mid .800 OPS.

 

Sorry for the inconvenience, and I'll be sure for now on to post both of my opinions from here on out. I always have two opinions on things, its just I tend to favor my personal gut opinion. I'm correct more far more often when I go with my initial instinct and opinion.

 

If you state clearly that this is merely your personal opinion, and you're not trying to prove a point, it's a whole different scenario.

 

You're entitled to think he'll be a bust, just like some others (me included) can think he'll thrive looking to make more money and going from Safeco to Fenway.

[callandor1000]

This is a lot of pessimistic guessing, really. There's really not much logic at all to that argument. Use career stats, rather than several small sample sizes to make your case.

 

That being said, I think a Lowell type offensive year is going to happen, with the defense being awesome.

 

Seriously, give those small sample sizes a rest.

 

I wasn't trying to use how he plays against AL East teams as how he will perform overall in Boston. I'm sorry I didn't make that clear. I had wrongly assumed that it would be self-explanatory.

 

Well I don't care half as much what this guy does against the rest of the MLB. My point with pointing out how he plays against AL East teams is not to illustrate how he plays against everyone, but how he's going to play in a good chunk of the games he has to play now. Hitting wise, if we're "upgrading" from Lowell then wouldn't it be more intelligent to upgrade with a player who is proven against the teams that we play the most? I mean he can be average against everyone else as long as he's plus against teams in our division.

 

We have guys already who can play very well against everyone. It's a tough division and if you can't perform against the teams you play the most then playing well against everyone else means less (not nothing, but less).

 

And this is just to point out that he's moving to a very tough division and has to face 3 or possibly 4 tough teams rather than just the Angels. This move shouldn't be labeled at this point as an obvious win. It shouldn't be labeled as an obvious loss, either.

[bsox0407]

I wasn't trying to use how he plays against AL East teams as how he will perform overall in Boston. I'm sorry I didn't make that clear. I had wrongly assumed that it would be self-explanatory.

 

Well I don't care half as much what this guy does against the rest of the MLB. My point with pointing out how he plays against AL East teams is not to illustrate how he plays against everyone, but how he's going to play in a good chunk of the games he has to play now. Hitting wise, if we're "upgrading" from Lowell then wouldn't it be more intelligent to upgrade with a player who is proven against the teams that we play the most? I mean he can be average against everyone else as long as he's plus against teams in our division.

 

We have guys already who can play very well against everyone. It's a tough division and if you can't perform against the teams you play the most then playing well against everyone else means less (not nothing, but less).

 

And this is just to point out that he's moving to a very tough division and has to face 3 or possibly 4 tough teams rather than just the Angels. This move shouldn't be labeled at this point as an obvious win. It shouldn't be labeled as an obvious loss, either.

 

think about how he played against the EAst and what team he was on. Its all about the difference of the lineup.

[Dipre]

I wasn't trying to use how he plays against AL East teams as how he will perform overall in Boston. I'm sorry I didn't make that clear. I had wrongly assumed that it would be self-explanatory.

 

Well I don't care half as much what this guy does against the rest of the MLB. My point with pointing out how he plays against AL East teams is not to illustrate how he plays against everyone, but how he's going to play in a good chunk of the games he has to play now. Hitting wise, if we're "upgrading" from Lowell then wouldn't it be more intelligent to upgrade with a player who is proven against the teams that we play the most? I mean he can be average against everyone else as long as he's plus against teams in our division.

 

We have guys already who can play very well against everyone. It's a tough division and if you can't perform against the teams you play the most then playing well against everyone else means less (not nothing, but less).

 

And this is just to point out that he's moving to a very tough division and has to face 3 or possibly 4 tough teams rather than just the Angels. This move shouldn't be labeled at this point as an obvious win. It shouldn't be labeled as an obvious loss, either.

 

Problem with that is Lowell wasn't "proven" against the AL East either. Or AL at all for that matter.

 

His numbers against AL East teams are a very small sample size, so it shouldn't be taken as a predictor of his future performance.

 

He's proven in the AL West, a division with good pitching and big stadiums. Not much else you can ask when acquiring a player.

[CoachC.]

[youtube=Beltre's Defense]I8IKDeH9SEg

 

A thing of beauty.

[Dipre]

[youtube=Beltre's Defense]I8IKDeH9SEg

 

A thing of beauty.

 

I can't wait to see this team take the field in 2010.

[Jasonbay44]

[youtube=Beltre's Defense]I8IKDeH9SEg

 

A thing of beauty.

 

My oh my, its going to be amazing seeing some of those plays this year instead of complaining about Lowell's mobility issues!

[Red Foreman]

There are a couple of people who still type like that ON A MESSAGE BOARD.

 

Text speak on message boards; it drives me nuts.

 

Text speak in texts; it drives me nuts.

[Imperial59]

Regardless' date=' this offense has taken another hit from Lowell to Beltre. The sox lineup doesnt scare me at all.[/quote']

 

Just curious, do you actually think that Lowell's a better overall player than Beltre, or are you nitpicking in an attempt to criticize the Sox for a move that actually makes them better?

[Dipre]

Text speak in texts; it drives me nuts.

 

You do know she's talking about cell phone message talk right?