Advertise on BaseballEvolution.com | Player Search by Baseball-Reference.com:


Compendium | Team Previews | About Us | Contact
Google Site Search: Web BaseballEvolution.com

BaseballEvolution.com - Fan Forum

Forum: BaseballEvolution.com - Fan Forum
Start a New Topic 
  
Author
Comment
Yankees get Swisher

Not sure how I feel about this yet, but just thought I'd tell you guys since I just found out. They gave up Betemit and a minor league pitcher. This probably means Giambi wont be coming back regardless of the the price.

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Or they could platoon Giambi/Swisher since Swish is a switch hitter.

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Actually it was Betemit, Jeff Marquez, and Jhonny Nunez for Swisher and Kanekoa Texeira.

Very good move by the Yankees. The bought low, and Swisher immediately becomes their best offensive outfielder or first baseman, depending upon where they would like to put him. And he gives them the flexibility to continue pursuing either Manny or Teixeira.

The Sox bought high and sold low; the three porospects they gave up for him are much better than the three players they got for him, and they lost another decent prospect to boot. Plus, the loss of Swisher will hurt their attendance figures, as he had legions of female fans in Chicago.

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Keith, I think you are ignoring the major question mark of which Nick Swisher is going to show up this season, the Nick Swisher that can get on base at a .400 clip, or the Nick Swisher who even with 24 homeruns and 82 walks posted a .742 OBP last season.

If the Nick Swisher of 2008 shows up for the Yankees in 2009, he won't be a better offensive player than Xavier Nady, Hideki Matsui, Bobby Abreu, or Johnny Damon (assuming they all return, which in Abreu's case is unlikely), and will be battling with Shelley Duncan and Melky Cabrera for playing time.

I like Swisher as much as the next guy, but put up or shut up I say. The guy has been pretty mediocre since May of 2007.

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Oh right, I forgot the Adam Dunn Rule: Once a player has a down year, he is doomed to continue declining for the rest of his career, regardless of his age, history, and tools.

Just to piss you off even more, Swisher had a better PrOPS in 2008 than any of the guys you mentioned.

Re: Yankees get Swisher

One of the things I kind of dislike about the way we argue is our willingness to re-craft what the other person has said in order to make it so stupid it is easy to disagree with.

You expressed an idea in absolute terms: "Swisher immediately becomes their best offensive outfielder or first baseman, depending upon where they would like to put him."

I responded with skepticism, noting:

"the major question mark of which Nick Swisher is going to show up this season"

and

"If the Nick Swisher of 2008 shows up for the Yankees in 2009 . . . "

You responded with:

"Once a player has a down year, he is doomed to continue declining for the rest of his career, regardless of his age, history, and tools."

This is kind of the opposite of my point, isn't it? My point really was, Nick Swisher has been amazingly inconsistent the last couple of years, and to assume based on THAT performance that he'll DEFINITELY be the best outfielder or first baseman on the Yankees next season is kind of presumptuous.

I agree that he COULD be that player, but he COULD also suck.

See what I'm saying?

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Funny that we would be having this conversation, because your conversation with Rich went a very similar way, with you playing the me role, and Rich playing the you role.

You raised the notion that acquiring Xavier Nady was suspect given his track record by saying:

"Nady has never hit more than 20 home runs in a season nor drawn more than 30 walks in a season, nor stolen more than 6 bases in a season, nor even played more than 130 games in a season.

He has not been good for three years, he has been good for three months. He is historically bad in the second half of seasons"

And then Rich did what you did in our exchange above, saying:

"I know, I forgot Keith. It is completely impossible for a player to ever improve."

Rich completely ignored your real point - Xavier Nady is PROBABLY a flash in the pan, given his record up until now - and morphed it into "It is completely impossible for a player to ever improve." Again, not exactly your point.

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Well then, let me take this point:

"Nick Swisher has been amazingly inconsistent the last couple of years."

That statement is false. Swisher had an OPS over .835 for his first two full major league seasons. Last year, he did not. You're right, this is a lot like the Nady situation: Nady overachieved for a few months, and Swisher underachieved for a few months. While it's possible that those couple of months painted an accurate picture of each player, it's highly unlikely.

And Swisher probably does not even need an OPS of over .835 to perform better than the bunch of rejects the Yankees currently have at the 1B/OF position. His career OPS of .805 should do the trick. That's all I'm saying.

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Have you even looked at Swisher's stats, or are you trying to divine them?

He had a 127 OPS+, 27.3 ABR, and an .836 OPS in 2007.
He has a 92 OPS+, -5.6 ABR, and a .742 OPS in 2008.

I can't possibly understand how one could look at those two seasons and not see a remarkably inconsistent player.

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Did you even read my post, or are you being deliberately obstinate?

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Having one good season, and one bad one makes a player remarkably inconsistent? Really?

Re: Yankees get Swisher

I don't see how you can look at only two seasons and see inconsistency.

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Wait a minute. Am I living in some sort of alternate universe?

The answer to Rich, Tony, and Keith is:

Yes.

Having one rather good season and following it up with one rather bad season does make a player inconsistent.

If we can't agree that "Nick Swisher has been inconsistent the last two years," then we can't agree on anything.

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Re: Yankees get Swisher

If you guys can look at Swisher's performance over the course of the last two seasons, his home/road splits, his first half/second half splits, his performance from month to month, and his 2007 performance vs. his 2008 performance and honestly tell me you think he has been a consistent player over the last couple of years, please do.

Does one good season followed by one bad season make a guy inconsistent over those two years? I think the answer is absolutely yes, by definition.

Can someone look at two seasons and see inconsistency? I don't see how performance over two seasons could possibly be considered inadequate.

Take an honest look at his numbers and tell me you see a consistent player.

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Re: Yankees get Swisher

And Keith, in response to you asking me if I read your whole post:

During which "few months" would you say Nick Swisher "underachieved"?

His first half OPS last season was .752. His second half was .725.

His month by month OPS was 719, 542, 1032, 676, 877, 547.

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Two years isn't a big enough sample size to dub a player inconsistent in terms of a year-to-year basis.

Re: Yankees get Swisher

In 2007, he was pretty consistent. Had an OPS over .800 in 4/5 months. In the first half his OPS was .841, in the second half it was .829. Not exactly the same, but not a big difference. Outside of that one bad month,he hit 3-5 HR every month. He did walk a little less in the last two months, however. The big thing that fluctuates the most is his BABIP, which obviously has an influence on his BA. And I don't think the Yankees want him for his BA. And he was better on the road, which is no surprise since McAfee is a pitcher's park, especially that season.

In 2008, he was very inconsistent. So you're right there, but again, it's only one year.

Re: Yankees get Swisher

You just compared his 2007 season to his 2008 season, and the difference was night and day.

I call that inconsistency.

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Re: Yankees get Swisher

I don't. It's a not a big enough sample size. He had good year one bad one. If he did that over the course of 5 seasons I'd agree.

Re: Yankees get Swisher

All I said was that he has been amazingly inconsistent over the last couple of years. Are you saying that is untrue?

Sample size is irrelevant. You can be inconsistent over a game, a series, a month, a half-season, a season, a couple of seasons, a decade, a career, whatever.

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Yes I'm saying it isn't true. He was inconsistent in 2008, not in 2007. If you're comparing 07 to 08, I don't think inconsistency is the right word since it is only two different seasons.

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Turning in one performance one season and then turning in a completely different performance the next season is, in and of itself, inconsistent.

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Re: Yankees get Swisher

And since this has become a semantic argument, let's get away from the "inconsistent" issue.

Is there really no one else that looks at Nick Swisher's performance over the last two years and has major question marks in their mind about what we are going to see from him in 2009?

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Re: Yankees get Swisher

And since I am bursting at the seams . . . .

Has no one else noticed that his home/road splits were Craig Biggio 2007 bad last year?

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Sorry - Craig Biggio 2006 bad.

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Re: Yankees get Swisher

"I can't possibly understand how one could look at those two seasons and not see a remarkably inconsistent player."

Matter of semantics or context? The way you have worded it, you are comparing one season in whole to another in whole and coming to an conclusion inconsistency which I believe in the way you have phrased it, can only be concluded when looking at a minimum of 3-4 years. You know, one bad, one good, one bad, one good.... That's inconsistent in the context that you have put it. One good followed by one bad in that context is not inconsistent. It's only a dropoff.

However, I certainly do share doubts about him going forward as well but mostly because I've always harbored some doubts about him.

Re: Yankees get Swisher

"His month by month OPS was 719, 542, 1032, 676, 877, 547."

Well, I would say that he underachieved every other month, i.e. for three months, hence a "few" months. His .378 OBP and 19 runs scored as the Sox' leadoff hitter in April was good enough for me, at any rate. I do realize that Ozzie guillen preferred the likes of Orlando Cabrera and AJ Pierzynski at the top, but by most objective measures, Swisher, normally a middle-of-the-order hitter, stepped up and did a better job.

Re: Yankees get Swisher

Wow. I can't believe Keith is sticking behind his statement that Nick Swisher is the best offensive player amongst New York Yankee outfielders and first basemen next season, even considering his pulseless 2008 performance.

I guess we'll see. It could happen, but I have my doubts. It certainly appears to be anything but a sure thing.

I sure do hope he can get his road OPS up over .600 next season.

City Philadelphia

Favorite Team Cubs

Get your own FREE Forum today! 
Report Content ·  · Web Calendars   Email Forms   Free Web Hosting   Cheap Domains 
powered by Powered by Bravenet bravenet.com

www.BaseballEvolution.com
Player Rankings | Hall of Fame | Trivia | Bonehead Sportswriters | Teams | Fun Stuff
Keith | Scott | Asher | Tony | Richard | Karl
About Us | Advertising | Submissions
BaseballEvolution.com is licensed under a Creative Commons License