Status quo critics need to supply answers
We've been over the argument for bringing up Jones. One side feels the upside in improved defense is worth the risk alone, the other argues for continuity.
Jones is obviously in Tacoma, so it's clear critics of the move are presently winning the debate.
However, the team is not exactly tearing the cover off the ball. While the team is sticking to established veterans, they aren't scoring a lot of runs in the process. Here are the team stats since the break:
This would make them the second worst hitting team in the AL since the break, ahead of only the A's. Now this is obviously a small sample size, and we did face the Tigers at home, but you can't make excuses forever. At some point this team will need to hit better, and more consistently if they want to make the post season. Can critics of the Jones move agree with that statement?
So for those against calling up Jones, I would like to hear a decent plan on how this team should upgrade its offense. You want Vidro to remain a DH. You want Ibanez to continue in LF. You got your wish. It is fair to ask how that is working?
I'm certainly not suggesting merely plugging in Jones makes the team an offensive juggernaut. The case for Jones has always been clear. You improve the outfield defense, you hope Jones provides adequate offense and you make the team better by removing Vidro and his powerless bat.
But at least it is a logical plan that is immediately implementable and is based on reasoned thinking. For all the Bill Krueger's, Shannon Drayer's and Bill Bavasi's of the world, I would like to see your plan, either on paper or on the field.
Frankly, the status quo is simply not getting it done. Hoping for outstanding pitching every game will not get this team to the post season.
(Note- I realize by posting this, the M's will likely score 15 runs tonight and Vidro will hit for the cycle. I've decided I'm okay with this, but my opinion stands.)
We've been over the argument for bringing up Jones. One side feels the upside in improved defense is worth the risk alone, the other argues for continuity.
Jones is obviously in Tacoma, so it's clear critics of the move are presently winning the debate.
However, the team is not exactly tearing the cover off the ball. While the team is sticking to established veterans, they aren't scoring a lot of runs in the process. Here are the team stats since the break:
| .255/ | .306/ | .376/ | .681 |
This would make them the second worst hitting team in the AL since the break, ahead of only the A's. Now this is obviously a small sample size, and we did face the Tigers at home, but you can't make excuses forever. At some point this team will need to hit better, and more consistently if they want to make the post season. Can critics of the Jones move agree with that statement?
So for those against calling up Jones, I would like to hear a decent plan on how this team should upgrade its offense. You want Vidro to remain a DH. You want Ibanez to continue in LF. You got your wish. It is fair to ask how that is working?
I'm certainly not suggesting merely plugging in Jones makes the team an offensive juggernaut. The case for Jones has always been clear. You improve the outfield defense, you hope Jones provides adequate offense and you make the team better by removing Vidro and his powerless bat.
But at least it is a logical plan that is immediately implementable and is based on reasoned thinking. For all the Bill Krueger's, Shannon Drayer's and Bill Bavasi's of the world, I would like to see your plan, either on paper or on the field.
Frankly, the status quo is simply not getting it done. Hoping for outstanding pitching every game will not get this team to the post season.
(Note- I realize by posting this, the M's will likely score 15 runs tonight and Vidro will hit for the cycle. I've decided I'm okay with this, but my opinion stands.)
posted by Tom at
12:56 PM
