shortsavage wrote:Mr.Cocky! wrote:I have been playing since 1998. I am not saying that Byrd is a bad player, I am just telling the message poster to swap Byrd for Crawford.
Yeah, I was more interested in your comments about unproven players.Mr.Cocky! wrote:The guy (Marlon Byrd) has not surpassed Crawford yet, so untill he does, how can it be said that he is better and more valuable.Mr.Cocky! wrote:All I am saying, is that with Crawford you know what you are getting, a ton of SB's. With Byrd, we are not sure what we are getting, because he has never had a full season as a starter.
How has your standing of not playing into players that are more prospective than proven treated you in the past?
What do you think of Josh Beckett and Miguel Cabrera?
What do you think of the phrase "the next big thing"?
The point Mr. Cocky makes, is simply not defensible on the facts. Minor league numbers, appropriately adjusted, are every bit as useful for predicting a player's future performance in the majors as past major league performance is. So, if we are projecting Byrd and Crawford, it matters not a bit whether that projection is based on "proven" major league numbers or "unproven" minor league numbers.
Which is not to say that Byrd is the better choice..something that seems to have been lost in the discussion. My initial point was not that Byrd should be the choice. As I initially said, it was simply to point out that this call was closer than many people were making it out to be.
Whether Byrd turns out to be the better pick, however, does not depend at all on proven versus unproven. It turns on whether the Phils allow Byrd to run. If so, he's proven that he's a better base stealer than Crawford and could easily come close to matching Crawford in SBs, while crushing him in HRs, scoring 30 more runs, and batting 20-40 points higher, because he's proven he's a better hitter. By the way, which Crawford is the one who is proven...the one who batted .259 in 2002 or the one who batted .281 in 2003.
Longer term, the edge might still go to Crawford, because of his youth, but guys with his poor plate discipline usually fade fast. He could buck the trend, but he's not done so yet.