CIN releases Jorge Cantu

[Brian the Automator]

wow. i agree that using the term "winner" doesn't smack of the kind of anal-retentive sabermetrical rhetoric that some of the more nit-picky members of this board are given to, but there's something to be said for a player's character and reputation, and that seems to be what reed is getting at. further, it stands to be said that reed has admitted an occasional proclivity to making statements on a whim (which i think is commendable, as very few bf.net members would deign to admit that the might actually be wrong every now and again), though i for one think he's onto something here. i don't particularly want rolen, nor do i think all that highly of crede, but i acknowledge both to have somewhat distinguished reputations as clubhouse presences and the like, and therein lies the concern with cantu. is he a bad player if he has a shaky disposition? not necessarily. can that be a huge liability? most definitely. the point here is that the brewers are a young team and the addition of another veteran "character guy" who has been around successful major league teams (a la suppan, counsell, etc.) would be a welcome addition to this team, and a poor attitude could be especially detrimental to a young team who will still certainly have their ups and downs.

 

i don't actually feel to strongly on this cantu topic, but i chose to post here because this thread seems to be going down a somewhat familiar stream on this board. one where established members have a good laugh at the expense of another member's comments - too often because they've taken out of context or blown out of proportion what was originally said. good-natured fun is a good thing, but something about the tone of threads like this strike me as being just above the kind of mockery that gets other, less familiar posters (myself in the next few posts?) reprimanded for chastising their fellow members' ideas. is high-brow, baseball-educated-condescension ok because of its in-crowd sensibilities?

There's a difference between saying a guy's a "winner" and a guy's a good "clubhouse guy". Most of us "nit-picky" members can recognize that there is SOME effect to bringing good character into a clubhouse. What we were simply asking was for Reed to explain what he meant by a "winner" instead of making some amorphous thing which the Joe Morgan's of the world bandy about without any elaboration whatsoever.

 

[Big Reed]

Unfortunately brian, that's not how you were coming across. I knew what you and others were saying because we've known each other for a few years. there's always been a little bit of a sarcastic tease between us. but for a new reader, sometimes that banter is not as obvious. it looks like you're picking on a guy (me) just becaused he used the term winner to describe why he liked a player rather than using stats.

 

The real story about Cantu is that his stats lie and do not accurately reflect the real player. Melvin knows this. Tampa's GM knew this as did Cincy's GM. Those people who rely only on stats don't know this. They don't have a grasp of the real player. When I was younger, I was a huge stats geek. I took 4 semesters of calculus and 5 semesters of stats. I have a math degree. Stats can be misleading. Stats do not tell the entire picture. Stats are only meant to be used as data for a decision maker to draw a conclusion. A real manager / decision maker uses more than just stats to make his decisions.

 

I believe Melvin knows all about Cantu. he has no interest. Despite cantu's tremendous OBP, he's a loser, not a winner. Cantu may be ok in the clubhouse, but he's a liability in the field, and his bat is no longer good enough to warrant a position as a back-up first baseman on an NL team.

[TooLiveBrew]

Ok, since you seem to show no signs of being able to part with the notion of clearly defining a player as either a "winner" or a "loser," I give up. As mentioned, there's no way for you to qualify that kind of labeling, but if you're convinced that you can accurately rate a player given this entirely subjective method, have at it.

 

EDIT: In a last-ditch attempt to stop the misinformation train, Jorge Cantu's career OBP is .312. "Tremendous"? Perhaps this one example is part of why you are incorrectly labeling guys 'winner'/'loser.' Cantu's stats really don't lie - they show what he is. Career OPS of .762, heavily weighted towards SLG, and not OBP. OBP is the more valuable part of OPS, so it means you have an Estrada-esque OPS, almost totally reliant upon SLG.

[flosses like fossas]

Unfortunately brian, that's not how you were coming across. I knew what you and others were saying because we've known each other for a few years. there's always been a little bit of a sarcastic tease between us. but for a new reader, sometimes that banter is not as obvious. it looks like you're picking on a guy (me) just because he used the term winner to describe why he liked a player rather than using stats.

right. it's obvious that you were both "in" on the joke. i've been checking this board for a few years, and i feel that most posters who are fitfully out of line are reprimanded and removed. however, my point had to do with a general mocking banter that sometimes occurs (especially between the longest-tenured, most frequent posting members) that can set a tone that seems misleading and can also be discouraging in the inevitable "in-crowd" fashion. not only that, it can get tiring to read a message board that reads like a chat exchange, because i feel a message board ought to be more substantial than that, and bf.net usually is.

p.s. i'm happy that the rolen trade is a non-issue and that boone has been signed safely away by the nationals

[Big Reed]

Toolive brew - forget the stats. forget the winner or loser labels. Look at the games played by position last year.

 

The simple facts are that cantu can no longer effectively play second or third base; and nobody really wants him as a back-up first baseman. if the brewers wanted or needed a back-up first baseman, brad nelson would be a better option than Cantu.