4C575A5B525E513F0 wrote: I would rather have Polanco in the outfield over Osuna, Alford, or Frazier.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
Alford is a very interesting player. While with the Jays he was a high end prospect. He did not get the chance to play on a regular basis with the Jays, and I think the Bucs are going to give him the opportunity next spring. It was unfortunate he got injured shortly after he was acquired by the Pirates. I think they intended to give him a lot of playing time the final month of the season to see what they had with him.
Adam Frazier
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
Adam Frazier
627974757C707F110 wrote: I would rather have Polanco in the outfield over Osuna, Alford, or Frazier.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
Interesting. Polanco has proven time and again that he's been terribly overrated and, after all these years and at his age, has nothing more to offer above what he's already done. I don't care about his income and what happens to it if he's released. I only care that the Pirates find someone better to play RF and, from my perspective, that's just about anyone.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
Interesting. Polanco has proven time and again that he's been terribly overrated and, after all these years and at his age, has nothing more to offer above what he's already done. I don't care about his income and what happens to it if he's released. I only care that the Pirates find someone better to play RF and, from my perspective, that's just about anyone.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
Adam Frazier
1F323F2E29382F6F6C5D0 wrote: So he'll be that much better for some other team when we dump him.
Then, we start all over again with the LMG that he's replaced by.
There are 2 major problems with the organization. One is the owner's unwillingness to spend. The other is the frequent misevaluation of players' abilities. Polanco was highly touted as a franchise type player. They said he had the ability to be a good CFer and was a good hitter with power and speed. So he became one of the few Pirates they were willing to pay to keep.
So while collecting a big salary he turned out to be a poor defensive outfielder, a low average hitter with moderate at best power and a clueless base runner. Certainly the money was misspent on Polanco but I'd rather have a competent player than keep him merely to avoid dumping his salary. Without even looking any further I'd play Osuna over Polanco.
I'd rather see an OF of Reynolds, Alford, Osuna.
Or Reynolds, Alford, Evans.
Or any combination of Reynolds, Alford, Osuna, Evans, Frazier.
Regardless of salary, Polanco is a detriment to the team and could easily be replaced by someone more productive. Even if it means a LMG. The team should not have to suffer thru another year of Polanco merely to avoid paying someone else less money to do a better job.
If your only interest in the Pirates is money, then I guess that makes you the Nutting on the opposite extreme. He doesn't want to improve any position if it involves spending money and you don't want to improve any position if it doesn't involve doesn't money.
The two factors are cheapness and incompetence. The rest is only detail.
Then, we start all over again with the LMG that he's replaced by.
There are 2 major problems with the organization. One is the owner's unwillingness to spend. The other is the frequent misevaluation of players' abilities. Polanco was highly touted as a franchise type player. They said he had the ability to be a good CFer and was a good hitter with power and speed. So he became one of the few Pirates they were willing to pay to keep.
So while collecting a big salary he turned out to be a poor defensive outfielder, a low average hitter with moderate at best power and a clueless base runner. Certainly the money was misspent on Polanco but I'd rather have a competent player than keep him merely to avoid dumping his salary. Without even looking any further I'd play Osuna over Polanco.
I'd rather see an OF of Reynolds, Alford, Osuna.
Or Reynolds, Alford, Evans.
Or any combination of Reynolds, Alford, Osuna, Evans, Frazier.
Regardless of salary, Polanco is a detriment to the team and could easily be replaced by someone more productive. Even if it means a LMG. The team should not have to suffer thru another year of Polanco merely to avoid paying someone else less money to do a better job.
If your only interest in the Pirates is money, then I guess that makes you the Nutting on the opposite extreme. He doesn't want to improve any position if it involves spending money and you don't want to improve any position if it doesn't involve doesn't money.
The two factors are cheapness and incompetence. The rest is only detail.
Adam Frazier
2D363B3A333F305E0 wrote: I would rather have Polanco in the outfield over Osuna, Alford, or Frazier.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
_______
What I see in Alford is a career .214 hitter with no power. What I see in Polanco is a career .246 hitter with some power.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
_______
What I see in Alford is a career .214 hitter with no power. What I see in Polanco is a career .246 hitter with some power.
Adam Frazier
Nothing to do with money, but if the Pirates are to keep Polanco, I'd rather see him playing over Osuna and Alford.
I don't get this continued fascination with Osuna. He's had more than enough opportunity, and the guy never hits, nor hits for power. At a bare minimum, Polanco has it over him there.
Of the two, who do you think is most likely to rebound and have a competent season? Anyone thinking that question over and says "Osuna" must have him in some sort of pool. The guy has never produced.
I don't get this continued fascination with Osuna. He's had more than enough opportunity, and the guy never hits, nor hits for power. At a bare minimum, Polanco has it over him there.
Of the two, who do you think is most likely to rebound and have a competent season? Anyone thinking that question over and says "Osuna" must have him in some sort of pool. The guy has never produced.
Adam Frazier
2925247F767F777A7D62784F0 wrote: I would rather have Polanco in the outfield over Osuna, Alford, or Frazier.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
Alford is a very interesting player. While with the Jays he was a high end prospect. He did not get the chance to play on a regular basis with the Jays, and I think the Bucs are going to give him the opportunity next spring. It was unfortunate he got injured shortly after he was acquired by the Pirates. I think they intended to give him a lot of playing time the final month of the season to see what they had with him.
is he really a high end prospect? He was ranked 34th (by Fangraphs entering the 2020 season). I hope he does well and that he turns into a great player and he may have been putting it together at AAA in 2019. I just don't think he is someone to count on. I agree they wanted to play him a lot the last month of the season, probably to help decide if he deserved a roster spot. He was a top 100 prospect at one time but he did strike out 30% of the time in 2018 and 2019. 2019 was first season where he showed some power (8 homers in about 300 at bats)
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
Alford is a very interesting player. While with the Jays he was a high end prospect. He did not get the chance to play on a regular basis with the Jays, and I think the Bucs are going to give him the opportunity next spring. It was unfortunate he got injured shortly after he was acquired by the Pirates. I think they intended to give him a lot of playing time the final month of the season to see what they had with him.
is he really a high end prospect? He was ranked 34th (by Fangraphs entering the 2020 season). I hope he does well and that he turns into a great player and he may have been putting it together at AAA in 2019. I just don't think he is someone to count on. I agree they wanted to play him a lot the last month of the season, probably to help decide if he deserved a roster spot. He was a top 100 prospect at one time but he did strike out 30% of the time in 2018 and 2019. 2019 was first season where he showed some power (8 homers in about 300 at bats)
Adam Frazier
372C212029252A440 wrote: I would rather have Polanco in the outfield over Osuna, Alford, or Frazier.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
You are looking at Polanco and still thinking its going to register. He looks the part without question. Alford is a better player.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
You are looking at Polanco and still thinking its going to register. He looks the part without question. Alford is a better player.
-
Bobster21
Adam Frazier
2A313C3D343837590 wrote: I would rather have Polanco in the outfield over Osuna, Alford, or Frazier.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
_______
What I see in Alford is a career .214 hitter with no power. What I see in Polanco is a career .246 hitter with some power.
The key word there is "career."
Alford's "career" consists of 51 games and 83 ABs with never more than 28 ABs in a season. That's the equivalent of about 7 games. A veteran player can have a good or bad week with 28 ABs but it's only a fraction of his season. Alford's career high 28 ABs isn't even a week's worth of playing. It's spread over 16 or 18 games. And for a young, inexperienced guy trying to acclimate to MLB pitching, he's never started more than 3 games in a row (which he did only twice in his "career").
Polanco's career consists of 2,838 games, 2,547 ABs, over 400 ABs 3 times including twice over 500. As long as he's been healthy he's been an everyday player each of his 7 seasons. He's had the opportunity to see plenty of MLB pitching, experience highs and lows and make adjustments as needed.
So comparing their "careers" is meaningless. Polanco has had ample time to establish himself and has demonstrated nothing more than mediocrity at best and often less than that. Alford is still waiting to start his 4th game in a row. At this point we have no idea what kind of career Alford will have. Because he hasn't had it yet.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
_______
What I see in Alford is a career .214 hitter with no power. What I see in Polanco is a career .246 hitter with some power.
The key word there is "career."
Alford's "career" consists of 51 games and 83 ABs with never more than 28 ABs in a season. That's the equivalent of about 7 games. A veteran player can have a good or bad week with 28 ABs but it's only a fraction of his season. Alford's career high 28 ABs isn't even a week's worth of playing. It's spread over 16 or 18 games. And for a young, inexperienced guy trying to acclimate to MLB pitching, he's never started more than 3 games in a row (which he did only twice in his "career").
Polanco's career consists of 2,838 games, 2,547 ABs, over 400 ABs 3 times including twice over 500. As long as he's been healthy he's been an everyday player each of his 7 seasons. He's had the opportunity to see plenty of MLB pitching, experience highs and lows and make adjustments as needed.
So comparing their "careers" is meaningless. Polanco has had ample time to establish himself and has demonstrated nothing more than mediocrity at best and often less than that. Alford is still waiting to start his 4th game in a row. At this point we have no idea what kind of career Alford will have. Because he hasn't had it yet.
Adam Frazier
4C616C7D7A6B7C3C3F0E0 wrote: I would rather have Polanco in the outfield over Osuna, Alford, or Frazier.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
_______
What I see in Alford is a career .214 hitter with no power. What I see in Polanco is a career .246 hitter with some power.
The key word there is "career."
Alford's "career" consists of 51 games and 83 ABs with never more than 28 ABs in a season. That's the equivalent of about 7 games. A veteran player can have a good or bad week with 28 ABs but it's only a fraction of his season. Alford's career high 28 ABs isn't even a week's worth of playing. It's spread over 16 or 18 games. And for a young, inexperienced guy trying to acclimate to MLB pitching, he's never started more than 3 games in a row (which he did only twice in his "career").
Polanco's career consists of 2,838 games, 2,547 ABs, over 400 ABs 3 times including twice over 500. As long as he's been healthy he's been an everyday player each of his 7 seasons. He's had the opportunity to see plenty of MLB pitching, experience highs and lows and make adjustments as needed.
So comparing their "careers" is meaningless. Polanco has had ample time to establish himself and has demonstrated nothing more than mediocrity at best and often less than that. Alford is still waiting to start his 4th game in a row. At this point we have no idea what kind of career Alford will have. Because he hasn't had it yet.
________
Can kicking.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
_______
What I see in Alford is a career .214 hitter with no power. What I see in Polanco is a career .246 hitter with some power.
The key word there is "career."
Alford's "career" consists of 51 games and 83 ABs with never more than 28 ABs in a season. That's the equivalent of about 7 games. A veteran player can have a good or bad week with 28 ABs but it's only a fraction of his season. Alford's career high 28 ABs isn't even a week's worth of playing. It's spread over 16 or 18 games. And for a young, inexperienced guy trying to acclimate to MLB pitching, he's never started more than 3 games in a row (which he did only twice in his "career").
Polanco's career consists of 2,838 games, 2,547 ABs, over 400 ABs 3 times including twice over 500. As long as he's been healthy he's been an everyday player each of his 7 seasons. He's had the opportunity to see plenty of MLB pitching, experience highs and lows and make adjustments as needed.
So comparing their "careers" is meaningless. Polanco has had ample time to establish himself and has demonstrated nothing more than mediocrity at best and often less than that. Alford is still waiting to start his 4th game in a row. At this point we have no idea what kind of career Alford will have. Because he hasn't had it yet.
________
Can kicking.
-
Bobster21
Adam Frazier
5D464B4A434F402E0 wrote: I would rather have Polanco in the outfield over Osuna, Alford, or Frazier.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
_______
What I see in Alford is a career .214 hitter with no power. What I see in Polanco is a career .246 hitter with some power.
The key word there is "career."
Alford's "career" consists of 51 games and 83 ABs with never more than 28 ABs in a season. That's the equivalent of about 7 games. A veteran player can have a good or bad week with 28 ABs but it's only a fraction of his season. Alford's career high 28 ABs isn't even a week's worth of playing. It's spread over 16 or 18 games. And for a young, inexperienced guy trying to acclimate to MLB pitching, he's never started more than 3 games in a row (which he did only twice in his "career").
Polanco's career consists of 2,838 games, 2,547 ABs, over 400 ABs 3 times including twice over 500. As long as he's been healthy he's been an everyday player each of his 7 seasons. He's had the opportunity to see plenty of MLB pitching, experience highs and lows and make adjustments as needed.
So comparing their "careers" is meaningless. Polanco has had ample time to establish himself and has demonstrated nothing more than mediocrity at best and often less than that. Alford is still waiting to start his 4th game in a row. At this point we have no idea what kind of career Alford will have. Because he hasn't had it yet.
________
Can kicking.
Broken record.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
_______
What I see in Alford is a career .214 hitter with no power. What I see in Polanco is a career .246 hitter with some power.
The key word there is "career."
Alford's "career" consists of 51 games and 83 ABs with never more than 28 ABs in a season. That's the equivalent of about 7 games. A veteran player can have a good or bad week with 28 ABs but it's only a fraction of his season. Alford's career high 28 ABs isn't even a week's worth of playing. It's spread over 16 or 18 games. And for a young, inexperienced guy trying to acclimate to MLB pitching, he's never started more than 3 games in a row (which he did only twice in his "career").
Polanco's career consists of 2,838 games, 2,547 ABs, over 400 ABs 3 times including twice over 500. As long as he's been healthy he's been an everyday player each of his 7 seasons. He's had the opportunity to see plenty of MLB pitching, experience highs and lows and make adjustments as needed.
So comparing their "careers" is meaningless. Polanco has had ample time to establish himself and has demonstrated nothing more than mediocrity at best and often less than that. Alford is still waiting to start his 4th game in a row. At this point we have no idea what kind of career Alford will have. Because he hasn't had it yet.
________
Can kicking.
Broken record.