PDA

View Full Version : Tony Womack Wants Second Base to Himself



Doc. Scott
02-21-2006, 06:13 PM
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstand/discussion/mlbq2/

I'll drop it here and just let the zingers fly.

realreds1
02-21-2006, 06:20 PM
Just make him earn it. Don't give it to him outright. That's all I ask for.

KronoRed
02-21-2006, 06:21 PM
I'm sure he knows it's his already.

Falls City Beer
02-21-2006, 06:24 PM
Here's the thing: Womack's speed isn't all that great anymore. Clearly he can't objectively look at himself.

registerthis
02-21-2006, 06:24 PM
That's perhaps the most ridiculous quote I've ever seen/heard attributed to a baseball player. Where, oh where, does one begin? With the idea that the Yankees somehow "held him back" and made him an awful player? That his biggest concern are the stats on the back of his card? Or, perhaps, this:


.....The intangibles never show up in the stats. People say I donít have a good on-base percentage. But when I get on, a lot of things happen. There are no stats for that.

In every possible statistical analysis, Tony, you were awful. You can't get on base, meaning you can't hit, and you can't take walks. That's a lethal combo. And not only were you awful last year but, with the exception of one above-average year with the Cardinals, you have been a mediocre player your entire career.

You're worried about the back of your baseball card? I'd worry more about keeping my OBP above the mendoza line. This guy is absolute junk. Thus, I've no doubt in my min dthat we'll be seeing him leading off and playing 2nd on Opening Day.

membengal
02-21-2006, 06:26 PM
I want one million dollars and private time with Scarlett Johannsen.

registerthis
02-21-2006, 06:26 PM
Here's the thing: Womack's speed isn't all that great anymore. Clearly he can't objectively look at himself.

He covered that, FCB, when he said the Yankees held him back. What he clearly meant is that the Yankees, literally, held him back--they tied weights to his shoes and chained him to the dugout fence. That's why it APPEARS that his speed was lacking last year. But, just you watch--free of the old ball and chain known as Steinbrenner, his lost speed will magically return.

MartyFan
02-21-2006, 06:27 PM
Yikes!

StillFunkyB
02-21-2006, 06:31 PM
I want one million dollars and private time with Scarlett Johannsen.

Here, Here! :beerme:

Tommyjohn25
02-21-2006, 06:45 PM
Meh, what's he supposed to say? This doesn't bother me. I am fully confident that he WILL NOT be HANDED 2nd base, if he is there on opening day, he will have earned it. This is not Miley, DanO and Linder anymore.

registerthis
02-21-2006, 06:48 PM
Meh, what's he supposed to say? This doesn't bother me. I am fully confident that he WILL NOT be HANDED 2nd base, if he is there on opening day, he will have earned it. This is not Miley, DanO and Linder anymore.

Saying that he wants the 2nd base job is fine.

Saying that OBP is an irrelevant stat is not.

RANDY IN INDY
02-21-2006, 06:55 PM
If he out and out earns the job, I don't have a problem with it. Production is the key.

KronoRed
02-21-2006, 06:57 PM
Meh, what's he supposed to say? This doesn't bother me. I am fully confident that he WILL NOT be HANDED 2nd base, if he is there on opening day, he will have earned it. This is not Miley, DanO and Linder anymore.
Still Narron.

Raisor
02-21-2006, 07:12 PM
Even if he somehow "earns" the job in Spring training, based on his play last year, and his whole career for that matter, he still shouldn't be the starter.

Freel, even if he has a bad spring, has more then proven he deserves to be the full time 2B.

Aronchis
02-21-2006, 07:22 PM
Womack better hope he still has a job come April. I think he and Aurilia are on thin ice. If SpecialK doesn't want them here, I think he will just ax them no matter how much "love" Narron gives them.

traderumor
02-21-2006, 07:23 PM
worse, he's a defensive liability.

M2
02-21-2006, 07:26 PM
.....The intangibles never show up in the stats. People say I don’t have a good on-base percentage. But when I get on, a lot of things happen. There are no stats for that.

Actually there are stats for it and Ryan Freel's vastly superior when it comes to making things happen when you get on base.

Caveat Emperor
02-21-2006, 07:56 PM
If he out and out earns the job, I don't have a problem with it. Production is the key.

Problem is, it's a lot easier to produce in a split-squad game than it is once they start counting the games.

One hot March isn't going to convince me he is anything other than his numbers indicate: a bad player with thoroughly mediocre career numbers and declining skill sit.

RedsBaron
02-21-2006, 08:12 PM
Actually there are stats for it and Ryan Freel's vastly superior when it comes to making things happen when you get on base.
And Freel has demonstrated the ability to consistently get on base. The Reds just need Freel to stay healthy and sober, and for Womack to be released.

MrCinatit
02-21-2006, 08:15 PM
i wouldn't mind seeing Womack start at second base.
just as long as it is not for the Reds on a consistent basis.

RedsBaron
02-21-2006, 08:41 PM
i wouldn't mind seeing Womack start at second base.
just as long as it is not for the Reds on a consistent basis.
I wouldn't mind seeing Womack start at second base just as long as it is not for the Reds.
I would love to see Womack start at second base for the Astros or Cubs or Cardinals or Braves or Giants or Dodgers or.......

lollipopcurve
02-21-2006, 09:57 PM
Womack won't make the team.

KronoRed
02-21-2006, 10:18 PM
I wouldn't mind seeing Womack start at second base just as long as it is not for the Reds.
I would love to see Womack start at second base for the Astros or Cubs or Cardinals or Braves or Giants or Dodgers or.......
I was just thinking the same.

I'd LOVE to see him start against us 162 times.

flyer85
02-21-2006, 10:28 PM
Freel is superior in every single phase of the game. Womack doesn't even deserve a roster spot, much less a starting spot. It would a shame if Womack makes the team at the expense of Olmedo.

corkedbat
02-21-2006, 11:24 PM
The thing that bothers me most about Womack is not his putrid OBP (though it is up there) - what worries me more is that he'll make the roster and perform as badly we fear. This will limit his starts/PA's, but not his ego and he'll become toxic in the clubhouse.

Ravenlord
02-22-2006, 12:32 AM
ah...gotta love those intangibles Aurilia and Womack are bringing. i hope Lopez, Encarnacion, Pena, and Dunn all learn how to be real ball players from this guys and can pick up their work ethic. :rolleyes:


based on what Womack said in the article, i'd have to say he's a Milo.

corkedbat
02-22-2006, 06:49 AM
Truth be told, I'd rather they brought Jimenez back that bring in Womack - and I loathed DeAngelo.

Tommyjohn25
02-22-2006, 08:14 AM
My money says he's a throw in when Kriv flips a trade before opening day.

KronoRed
02-22-2006, 11:34 AM
Truth be told, I'd rather they brought Jimenez back that bring in Womack - and I loathed DeAngelo.
I drafted him in fantasy ball last year.

I'll never forgive him ;)

Tony Cloninger
02-22-2006, 01:49 PM
This is RA situation Part Deux....... same whining and complaining is going to happen when he does not play.

I can see the headlines...... "Reds holding me back from a HOF finish to my career."

remdog
02-22-2006, 02:15 PM
I am more than willing to give Tony title to second base. For all his own and no one else. Now, Tony, take that nice white base and lug it home. Do not report to camp. Do not come anywhere near Cincinnati Reds spring training. Do not ever claim that you were ever a member of the Reds.

Second base is yours. Curl up on the couch and never, ever entertain thoughts of actually ever playing a game for the Cincinnati Reds.

Have a nice retirement.

Rem

guttle11
02-22-2006, 02:26 PM
Tony's only getting second handed to him by default. That darn Freel is just too good of a utility player to hold down to one position.

BoydsOfSummer
02-22-2006, 02:37 PM
That out machine aint gettin' second base. I'll waddle my fat-ass out there and cover it if'n I have to...

Chip R
02-22-2006, 02:53 PM
That out machine aint gettin' second base. I'll waddle my fat-ass out there and cover it if'n I have to...
You'd probably have better range.

You know, I have thought for several years that eventually Womack would be a Red. I kinda thought that wouldn't happen once JimBo was fired but, sadly, someone who has even worse skills in evaluating talent replaced him. :(

REDREAD
02-22-2006, 02:59 PM
Saying that OBP is an irrelevant stat is not.

It's human nature to be defensive about your job if you have millions of people on the internet saying that you stink.

I'd feel the same way if people claimed I was bad at my job based on one metric.

I'm not saying Womack deserves to play 2b, but he is a useful bench player at least. For what the Reds are paying him, it's not a bad deal. We have Hattenberg to give us OBP off the bench (hopefully). Womack will be useful as a pinch runner and for his versatility on defense. Sure, he's not a gold glove, but he's adequate for a bench player.

Again, if I could assemble a dream team, I would not pick Womack, but we could have much worse on the roster (Machado, etc).

M2
02-22-2006, 03:03 PM
I'm not saying Womack deserves to play 2b, but he is a useful bench player at least. For what the Reds are paying him, it's not a bad deal. We have Hattenberg to give us OBP off the bench (hopefully). Womack will be useful as a pinch runner and for his versatility on defense. Sure, he's not a gold glove, but he's adequate for a bench player.

I suppose Womack's equally awfully at any position in the field, so that's a type of versatility. As for speed, who cares if you can't find first and you can't field? If you want someone to pinch run and play a few positions reasonably well, Rainer Olmedo can give you more than Womack for a fraction of the cost.

Matt700wlw
02-22-2006, 03:10 PM
I want one million dollars and private time with Scarlett Johannsen.

http://www.scarlettjohansson.org/gallery/albums/publicappearances/2006/goldenglobes/normal_002.jpg

Amen, brother.

SteelSD
02-22-2006, 05:53 PM
It's human nature to be defensive about your job if you have millions of people on the internet saying that you stink.

I'd feel the same way if people claimed I was bad at my job based on one metric.

Well, if you were a data entry clerk and could only type 1 word per minute, that's what we'd call a "problem".


I'm not saying Womack deserves to play 2b, but he is a useful bench player at least. For what the Reds are paying him, it's not a bad deal. We have Hattenberg to give us OBP off the bench (hopefully). Womack will be useful as a pinch runner and for his versatility on defense. Sure, he's not a gold glove, but he's adequate for a bench player.

Phrases I've seen typed recently on Redszone:

"Sure, he's not a gold glove, but..."

"Sure, he's not an All-Star, but..."

"Sure, he's not Cy Young, but..."

Generally, when I see those phrases, I know we're talking about an awful player.

Tony Womack was worth -4 (negative) Win Shares above Bench level in 2005. Only two position players in MLB were worth less- Corey Patterson (-5 WSAB) and Christian Guzman (-6 WSAB).

The two worst players in MLB? Eric Milton (-7 WSAB) and Jose Lima (-8 WSAB). Wrap your brain around that. Tony womack was over half as damaging to the Yankees as a full season of Eric Milton circa 2005. And that's a season in which Womack grabbed all of 351 PA. You start equalizing for Plate Appearances and Womack leapfrogs over Patterson on the suckitude meter and walks hand in hand with Guzman to claim the worst position player in the game title.


Again, if I could assemble a dream team, I would not pick Womack, but we could have much worse on the roster (Machado, etc).

No. You really couldn't have much worse on the roster because Womack is the epitome of "much worse". 1,329 MLB players put on a uniform and took the field in 2005. 677 of them were position players. Womack was a virtual tie for 676th with the 677th guy (Guzman).

As for Eric Milton ranking 1,328th out of 1,329?

"Well, he's no Cy Young, but..."

Get the picture?

creek14
02-22-2006, 06:17 PM
I'm thinking (really I do sometimes) if Tony is handed the 2nd base job and stinks, KSky and RCast aren't going to put up with it.

It's not DanO and Uncle Carl anymore.

Redsland
02-22-2006, 07:09 PM
I'm thinking (really I do sometimes) if Tony is handed the 2nd base job and stinks, KSky and RCast aren't going to put up with it.

It's not DanO and Uncle Carl anymore.
:pray:

KronoRed
02-22-2006, 08:03 PM
I'm thinking (really I do sometimes) if Tony is handed the 2nd base job and stinks, KSky and RCast aren't going to put up with it.

It's not DanO and Uncle Carl anymore.
That's a good hope, but still Narron, old school is here :help:

REDREAD
02-22-2006, 11:38 PM
If you want someone to pinch run and play a few positions reasonably well, Rainer Olmedo can give you more than Womack for a fraction of the cost.

I can respect your opinion, but I think Olmedo would OBP less than Womack.

Olmedo might be a better glove, but I'm not so sure about that. He didn't seem that impressive to me (defensively) when he came up.

As far as cost, Olmedo at 350k vs Womack at about 900k is close enough that it's not an issue.

REDREAD
02-22-2006, 11:43 PM
No. You really couldn't have much worse on the roster because Womack is the epitome of "much worse".

Get the picture?

I don't think Machado, Olmedo, or Bergollia would be better. That's my point.

I would've rather signed Pokey Reese instead of Womack, but maybe Reese doesn't want to come back.

That's what we're dealing with on the free agent front.. no one wants to come here unless they are overpaid.

Womack was acquired for basically free (non prospects), and he only costs 900k. He's better than any MI in our minors right now. Sure, that's faint praise.

So, even at -4 win shares, I'm afraid Womack is an upgrade. Our team is that bad.

I do agree that it would've been nice to get a better MI, but we need stopgaps. We shouldn't trade good talent for stopgaps. We can't seem to attract free agents. Thus, we're stuck with the Aurillias and Womacks for now.

M2
02-23-2006, 12:01 AM
I can respect your opinion, but I think Olmedo would OBP less than Womack.

Olmedo might be a better glove, but I'm not so sure about that. He didn't seem that impressive to me (defensively) when he came up.

As far as cost, Olmedo at 350k vs Womack at about 900k is close enough that it's not an issue.

If Olmedo can OB .280 he's got an excellent shot of finishing ahead of Womack.

Everyone's got a better glove than Womack, everyone.

I'll give you the money point. I wouldn't care about it if Womack could play a little ... but he can't. So it really doesn't matter what he's paid. He could play for free and I wouldn't want him on the team. Mind you, if he spends most of his time on the bench, then he's a comedy act I can live with. If he starts a lot, then it's time for a red alert.

KronoRed
02-23-2006, 12:03 AM
So, even at -4 win shares, I'm afraid Womack is an upgrade. Our team is that bad.

Then why waste time with him? why not run Olmedo and Bergolla and even Machado out there and see what happens? Womack stinks..and nothing will change that, the other 3 at least have youth on their side, Womack has nothing.

SteelSD
02-23-2006, 02:05 AM
I don't think Machado, Olmedo, or Bergollia would be better. That's my point.

Each of those players would be cheaper and every one is a defensive upgrade over Tony Womack.


I would've rather signed Pokey Reese instead of Womack, but maybe Reese doesn't want to come back.

Don't want Reese back. If Pokey Reese is, in your mind, considered an upgrade over Womack then that's really a testament to how bad Womack is.

And let's face facts here. Tony Womack is a less productive version of Rich Aurilia. Veteran player who thinks he deserves a starting spot based on nothing. No. Correction. Based on less than nothing.


That's what we're dealing with on the free agent front.. no one wants to come here unless they are overpaid.

We both know that Tony Womack wasn't a Free Agent. But the Reds didn't NEED a Free Agent to come in to replicate the probable value of a Tony Womack. They have that on hand.


Womack was acquired for basically free (non prospects), and he only costs 900k. He's better than any MI in our minors right now. Sure, that's faint praise.

That's not faint praise. It's entirely wrong. Bergolla and Olmedo could replicate Tony Womack numbers with better range at 2B. Frankly, I'd have a hard time believing that Adam Rosales couldn't be promoted right now and, at minimum, replicate Womack's Run value. Ditto with Kevin Howard- the "non-prospect" who was dealt for Womack.


So, even at -4 win shares, I'm afraid Womack is an upgrade. Our team is that bad.

I do agree that it would've been nice to get a better MI, but we need stopgaps. We shouldn't trade good talent for stopgaps. We can't seem to attract free agents. Thus, we're stuck with the Aurillias and Womacks for now.

That's minus-4 Win Shares ABOVE BENCH level. There wasn't a player on the Reds worth less than that last year excepting Eric Milton. There wasn't a position player who put on a MLB uniform who was worse than Tony Womack in 2005. Frank Menechino (.257 Equivalent Average)- a guy signed to a minor league deal with an invite to ST- was worth more WSAB than was Tony Womack (.224 Equivalent Average).

Even if the Reds couldn't attract Free Agents (on that, I disagree), the Reds can sign better players than Tony Womack even if said players are guys no one else wants (see: Menechino, Frank).

And yet a guy like Menechino knows his role. A guy like Womack is going to complain every day he's out of the lineup. You don't need that from a non-producer. Ever. Rich Aurilia might be a complete Milo, but at least he's semi-productive offensively. But you get both he and Womack in the same clubhouse and pretty soon you're going to get a couple guys talking about how they're BOTH ticked off about their limited roles and who are even more completely unwilling to mentor the younger players who actually deserve those roles.

Why in the world does any team need that from the end of their bench? Furthermore, why in the world does any team need to spend over 2 million bucks for that on the end of their bench?

savafan
02-23-2006, 02:32 AM
It's human nature to be defensive about your job if you have millions of people on the internet saying that you stink.

I'd feel the same way if people claimed I was bad at my job based on one metric.

I'm not saying Womack deserves to play 2b, but he is a useful bench player at least. For what the Reds are paying him, it's not a bad deal. We have Hattenberg to give us OBP off the bench (hopefully). Womack will be useful as a pinch runner and for his versatility on defense. Sure, he's not a gold glove, but he's adequate for a bench player.

Again, if I could assemble a dream team, I would not pick Womack, but we could have much worse on the roster (Machado, etc).

REDREAD, I like you much better when you're being negative. :p:

Sure, TMack may only get on base 2 times out of every 10 plate appearances, but when he does, look out!

http://www.nomaas.org/images/womackthings1.jpg