You can hope, wish, or pray that our "prospects" will turn into super duper stars, but you're fooling yourself.
Your boy hudson was a prospect once too.
I dont think anyone here thought Hairston was going to be a superstar, but im still not sure he was ever given a chance to play on a consistant basis.
The frustrating part about that trade, is not that he was traded, or even traded for anything good - its that we traded a guy with some upside within the division -for basially nothing... why couldnt we have sent him to KC for nothing?
Maybe he wont turn into a hill of beans, but his minor league record is pretty darn good. That at least shows some potential...
You're right, Hudson was once a prospect. But he never had a .220 career batting average following any part of his major league career and by age 27. he was on his way to winning a gold glove.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 295
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 10:32 am Post subject:
qudjy1 wrote:
I think we all just wanted to see SH get a fair chance - and that fair chance could (empasis on COULD) make him a pretty good player. Why we are giving that chance to SD is beyond me.
The hard fact is, once you reach Hairston's age, you get the playing time you deserve. Hairston got 42 starts this season, so we're not talking a cup of coffee - he did nothing to justify giving him more time. He started most of the games in April...and batted .224.
_________________
Jim McLennan
AZ SnakePit
I think we all just wanted to see SH get a fair chance - and that fair chance could (empasis on COULD) make him a pretty good player. Why we are giving that chance to SD is beyond me.
The hard fact is, once you reach Hairston's age, you get the playing time you deserve. Hairston got 42 starts this season, so we're not talking a cup of coffee - he did nothing to justify giving him more time. He started most of the games in April...and batted .224.
That's the gist right there. Hairston HAD the opportunity in April, when Q was on the DL, to put up some solid numbers and show that he deserves to be in the mix for the LF spot in 08. He didn't hit. Period.
In the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make...
_________________
Shoewizard is my Daddy
Fwiw, this is BPro's Christina Kahrl's take on the Hairston trade
From AZ's perspective
Quote:
Hairston's latest failure informed a decision to cut bait on him, and I think there's something almost delightfully contemptuous in their depositing him with a team they're trying to fend off for a playoff spot. I can imagine this is really all about wanting to hit balls at Hairston to at least give flyballs a better chance of dropping in safely in Petco in those key head-to-head matchups. Rosales is no great shakes, an organizational soldier who made a wee bit of a good impression while closing in the Arizona Fall League last winter, and who has similarly been closing games for Portland. He's not going to impress speed guns or scouts, but he's got that moxie thing going for him, and that's been good enough to get some guys jobs at the back end of big league bullpens.
From SD's perspective
Quote:
While I can understand the team's desire to add a right-handed bat to their outfield mix, and while Rosales is nothing special, I just don't hold out any great expectations for what's going to happen with Hairston coming into Petco. He's never really shown a consistent ability to hit right-handed pitching, and seems to be just another Snakeling hopped up on the helium that goes with playing in a series of bandboxes affiliated with Arizona. Add in that he's an aspiring DH, and I don't quite get what it is that he offers that the Pads really just had to have. I can understand the virtue of deciding to give Brian Giles a prospective platoon partner, but I don't know why you'd make a point of getting Hairston when there are guys like Bobby Kielty floating around who should come even more cheaply.
I think we all just wanted to see SH get a fair chance - and that fair chance could (empasis on COULD) make him a pretty good player. Why we are giving that chance to SD is beyond me.
The hard fact is, once you reach Hairston's age, you get the playing time you deserve. Hairston got 42 starts this season, so we're not talking a cup of coffee - he did nothing to justify giving him more time. He started most of the games in April...and batted .224.
I dont know if 500+ abs is enough time to say anything... again, not saying this is a superstar - just a guy with potentila..
I think we all just wanted to see SH get a fair chance - and that fair chance could (empasis on COULD) make him a pretty good player. Why we are giving that chance to SD is beyond me.
The hard fact is, once you reach Hairston's age, you get the playing time you deserve. Hairston got 42 starts this season, so we're not talking a cup of coffee - he did nothing to justify giving him more time. He started most of the games in April...and batted .224.
That's the gist right there. Hairston HAD the opportunity in April, when Q was on the DL, to put up some solid numbers and show that he deserves to be in the mix for the LF spot in 08. He didn't hit. Period.
In the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make...
First 2 weeks of the season - Hairston did ok.. postng a 741 ops (again, not saying great - just not that horrible either) - and thats when both the PT, and the production dropped off..
For just about the rest of the year - he has started one out of every 3-4 games or so.
Last edited by qudjy1 on Sat Jul 28, 2007 11:57 am; edited 1 time in total
I guess I agree with everyone here. I am so agreeable. I would have liked Scott to get 500 ab's before he was 27. I still think he will be a decent major league hitter.
OTOH, I don't see him as star. He could have been a star if he could have played 2b. As a lf, I think he will just another guy who will have a 820 or so OPS and play good D for a lf. He can still make 5M per doing this, but it is not someone you plan around.
I would have been real tempted to DFA Davavon. My guess is that JB and BoMel had a real heart to heart about this and BoMel prevailed on the roster construction issue. I can see this, but I sure hate losing Scotty for such a pittance.
Last edited by stu on Sat Jul 28, 2007 11:49 am; edited 1 time in total
You're right, Hudson was once a prospect. But he never had a .220 career batting average following any part of his major league career and by age 27. he was on his way to winning a gold glove.
Well, Hudson didnt exactly light the world on fire with his offense his first 3-4 years either - but he really isnt that kind of player anyway.
The main thing you will notice is that he got ALOT of consistant PT
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 295
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 12:31 pm Post subject:
Was just looking back at some of the old threads in which we discussed Hairston, particularly this one. Here's a couple of quotes from our board stalwarts: names removed to avoid embarrassment:
Quote:
If Scott looks solid enough defensively in LF (his bat doesn't worry me as he'll rake) and Krynzel impresses, especially defensively in CF and at the corners, and appears to have finally figured shit out, the Dbacks should trade Eric Byrnes this spring. And I know, I've said this before, but it's really about time.
Quote:
Scott Hairston should be the everyday LF; and when CQ comes back, make EB the #4 OF. Real simple.
Rather glad those two options didn't happen, as Byrnes basically carried the team for the first half... Though it has to be said, we were all basically wildly optimistic about most of our young players' output. Still trying to work that one out, but I know my expectations for the next wave have been radically tempered. However, the writing was on the wall early on. Here's a post by Shoe from April 16:
shoewizard wrote:
Scott has not played his way into a starting role yet. He still may do that. It's a long season. But he will be sent to the bench as soon as today or tmw when Q comes back, and he will have to just keep his head up and be ready to play whenever he gets a chance, and try to do the most with whatever opportunities he gets. Furthermore, unless Chris Young starts to hit some more, clearly Hairston's playing time is going to come at the expense of Chris Young a lot more than Eric Byrnes.
Was just looking back at some of the old threads in which we discussed Hairston, particularly this one. Here's a couple of quotes from our board stalwarts: names removed to avoid embarrassment:
Ah, dish it out, I can take it...
_________________
Shoewizard is my Daddy
At least, in my defense, I wasn't arguing that the Dbacks should've kept Josh Kroeger instead of signing Eric Byrnes... like some people on Jim's blog were opining back at the end of 2005 ...
A) Anyone who thinks Hairston was "given a chance" doesn't really understand what given a chance really is.
B) Scott Hairston playing in San Diego will come back to haunt the D backs. Take that to the bank.
Totally agree on A)
Partially agree on B) with the caveat that I don't think there were many other teams (if any) outside of the NL west that were offering anything useful for Hairston. Sometimes, you have to hit the ugly girl if she's the only one left...
I'd like to think that the JB traded Hairston to SD because Scotty would have a legitimate shot to start there next year (as opposed to, say, sending him to Tampa or Houston). Or maybe I'm just naive to think that JB was really thinking of Scotty... and all he really wanted was a sub-par defensive outfielder in the vast outfield of Petco for when AZ visits...
Speaking of the TRUE definition of being "given a chance", a regular reader of this board sent me the link to this article
Quote:
One day after trading starting second baseman Tadahito Iguchi to the Phillies for a Minor League pitcher, Guillen announced that if everything goes to plan, Richar will be the starting second baseman for the duration of the 2007 season.
Instead of the pressure that one might expect would accompany such high expectations, Richar said he found his manager's statement calming.
"When the manager gives you his confidence, it makes you feel more comfortable," Richar said. "When you know that they trust you, it helps you relax a little bit. I'm just trying to do my job, and we'll see what happens. I'll play hard and go from there."
A) Anyone who thinks Hairston was "given a chance" doesn't really understand what given a chance really is.
B) Scott Hairston playing in San Diego will come back to haunt the D backs. Take that to the bank.
Totally agree on A)
Partially agree on B) with the caveat that I don't think there were many other teams (if any) outside of the NL west that were offering anything useful for Hairston. Sometimes, you have to hit the ugly girl if she's the only one left...
I'd like to think that the JB traded Hairston to SD because Scotty would have a legitimate shot to start there next year (as opposed to, say, sending him to Tampa or Houston). Or maybe I'm just naive to think that JB was really thinking of Scotty... and all he really wanted was a sub-par defensive outfielder in the vast outfield of Petco for when AZ visits...
Speaking of the TRUE definition of being "given a chance", a regular reader of this board sent me the link to this article
Quote:
One day after trading starting second baseman Tadahito Iguchi to the Phillies for a Minor League pitcher, Guillen announced that if everything goes to plan, Richar will be the starting second baseman for the duration of the 2007 season.
Instead of the pressure that one might expect would accompany such high expectations, Richar said he found his manager's statement calming.
"When the manager gives you his confidence, it makes you feel more comfortable," Richar said. "When you know that they trust you, it helps you relax a little bit. I'm just trying to do my job, and we'll see what happens. I'll play hard and go from there."
Russell Branyan's Résumé is on monster.com if anybody's hiring.
So he's not gonna start!
Quote:
Hairston will be a reserve outfielder, taking the role of Terrmel Sledge, who was sent to the minors on Wednesday when the team called up pitcher Clay Hensley.
_________________
"The Diamondbacks led the NL in victories, conventional wisdom said that they were too young, too inexperienced to go any further. There are people getting paid to say things like this, and all you can do with them is change the channel."
-Mike Bauman
With Bradley, Cameron, Cruz and Giles already on the squad, I really don't see Hairston getting a boat load of playing time in SD. Unless there is another deal in the works for the Padres.
A) Anyone who thinks Hairston was "given a chance" doesn't really understand what given a chance really is.
B) Scott Hairston playing in San Diego will come back to haunt the D backs. Take that to the bank.
Really....?
Scotty was given a chance, when Q was injured during April.
After Q was sent down, he still had chance to make sure, Q stays in AAA.
But he could never VOW the coaches.
Take a look at Mark Reynolds.
When he got called up, he knew his stay would be short one, untill Tracy is healthy again. But he played so well, now its Tracy that needs to worry about his PT.
Point is that Scotty got chances to make Q worry about his PT, but he didnt.
A) Anyone who thinks Hairston was "given a chance" doesn't really understand what given a chance really is.
B) Scott Hairston playing in San Diego will come back to haunt the D backs. Take that to the bank.
Really....?
Scotty was given a chance, when Q was injured during April.
After Q was sent down, he still had chance to make sure, Q stays in AAA.
But he could never VOW the coaches.
Take a look at Mark Reynolds.
When he got called up, he knew his stay would be short one, untill Tracy is healthy again. But he played so well, now its Tracy that needs to worry about his PT.
Point is that Scotty got chances to make Q worry about his PT, but he didnt.
How many ABs did SH get in those 3-4 weeks that Q was out?
I believe that Scotty got about as many chances as he was going to get in AZ. Read it any way you want. He wasn't going to get more chances than he did, and he didn't do much with the chances he got. He got hurt in both 05 and 06, when the Dbacks were thinking about giving him more at bats here, and he just didn't do enough with his (albeit limited) chances in 07 to change anyone's mind in the Front Office. Sometimes, a player needs a change of scenery...
_________________
Shoewizard is my Daddy
A) Anyone who thinks Hairston was "given a chance" doesn't really understand what given a chance really is.
B) Scott Hairston playing in San Diego will come back to haunt the D backs. Take that to the bank.
Really....?
Scotty was given a chance, when Q was injured during April.
After Q was sent down, he still had chance to make sure, Q stays in AAA.
But he could never VOW the coaches.
Take a look at Mark Reynolds.
When he got called up, he knew his stay would be short one, untill Tracy is healthy again. But he played so well, now its Tracy that needs to worry about his PT.
Point is that Scotty got chances to make Q worry about his PT, but he didnt.
How many ABs did SH get in those 3-4 weeks that Q was out?
Reynolds needed only 2 weeks
How many AB's do you think scotty needed, for someone who had 13 HR's in 2004 ?
Scotty was given a chance, when Q was injured during April.
After Q was sent down, he still had chance to make sure, Q stays in AAA.
But he could never VOW the coaches.
Take a look at Mark Reynolds.
When he got called up, he knew his stay would be short one, untill Tracy is healthy again. But he played so well, now its Tracy that needs to worry about his PT.
Point is that Scotty got chances to make Q worry about his PT, but he didnt.
I think the real issue is that this organization cannot say that they gave Hairston every opportunity to succeed. Not even close. Sometimes players slip through the cracks - everyone understands that and no one expects an organization to bat 1.000 in terms of personnel decisions. That said, players with successful track records shouldn't be slipping through the cracks when the organization isn't contending and when there isn't a long-term solution blocking the path to the majors.
Despite being the youngest team in baseball, the Diamondbacks still aren't committed to a development-first approach. They only give consistency to veterans who aren't part of the long-term picture here. It's inexcusable. The roster crunch should never have happened: Jackson, Hairston, and Quentin should've received enough PT the last two years for these decisions to have already been made.
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
