The Great Chris Burke to start at SS tonight

[MusicMan]

Per ESPN 790.

[jasonact]

Quote:
Per ESPN 790.

How good is Wandy at making throws from the hole?

P.S. How is Jim's heart doing?

[OldBlevins]

Quote:

Quote:
Per ESPN 790.

How good is Wandy at making throws from the hole?

P.S. How is Jim's heart doing?

I'm still mad at Tal Smith for putting that hole in the infield.

[David in Jackson]

Well, this is why they let him try it in ST.  Let's see.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
Per ESPN 790.

How good is Wandy at making throws from the hole?

P.S. How is Jim's heart doing?

Burke needs to be moving forward on every play he makes.  If we can watch Furcal play short, we can watch Burke play short.

[Limey]

Quote:
Burke needs to be moving forward on every play he makes.  If we can watch Furcal play short, we can watch Burke play short.

Just without the arm to overcome the positioning/footwork flaws.

[Gizzmonic]

All I can say is-this should be interesting...

[Fredia]

well we as fans shall see if he is a good at billed. just hope evertte gets back as soon as possible. i wonder if burkes bat will make any difference in the line up

[rifraft]

I'm just hoping that he doesn't have to show us how "good" he really is in the field.  Some easy 6-3 outs would be fine, I don't need to see him making throws from deep in the hole, or from the edge of the outfield grass.

[Limey]

Quote:
well we as fans shall see if he is a good at billed. just hope evertte gets back as soon as possible. i wonder if burkes bat will make any difference in the line up

I think Burke's bat will come back down to Earth with regular play.  Maybe he can stay hot (it would be nice), but I'm not expecting it.  If his bat does cool off, and his defense at SS is as shakey as some of us fear, we may see more of The Crimson Chin.  FWIW, I think CC's earned it, too.

[MusicMan]

Quote:
we may see more of The Crimson Chin.  

PLEASE tell me this isn't in urbandictionary.com.

[Limey]

Quote:
PLEASE tell me this isn't in urbandictionary.com.

It might be, and I think I've just pictured what it might be in reference to, but that's not the context in which I'm using it.

Edit:  Wow!  It is the correct context.  I shall now keep to myself the mental picture I conjoured.

[NeilT]

So completely ignoring the trip down menstrual lane taken by Music Man and Limey, I'm still baffled by the collective assumption--nay?  Shall I say it?  Desire--for Chris Burke to fail.  Burke played well in left last year.  He's shown some indication that he might be a fine hitter.  I haven't heard anyone say he wasn't a fine second baseman in the minors.  What's the deal?

[Golden Sombrero]

Quote:

Quote:
PLEASE tell me this isn't in urbandictionary.com.

It might be, and I think I've just pictured what it might be in reference to, but that's not the context in which I'm using it.

Edit:  Wow!  It is the correct context.  I shall now keep to myself the mental picture I conjoured.

You must be thinking of Red Wings...and I don't mean the hockey team from Detroit.

[chuck]

Quote:
So completely ignoring the trip down menstrual lane taken by Music Man and Limey, I'm still baffled by the collective assumption--nay?  Shall I say it?  Desire--for Chris Burke to fail.  Burke played well in left last year.  He's shown some indication that he might be a fine hitter.  I haven't heard anyone say he wasn't a fine second baseman in the minors.  What's the deal?

I've always been confused about the derisive description often applied to him, 'Punch and Judy.' If all he hits are singles and doubles but he hits a shitload of them why is that bad? No one expects corner-type mashing out of the guy.

[MusicMan]

Quote:
So completely ignoring the trip down menstrual lane taken by Music Man and Limey, I'm still baffled by the collective assumption--nay?  Shall I say it?  Desire--for Chris Burke to fail.  Burke played well in left last year.  He's shown some indication that he might be a fine hitter.  I haven't heard anyone say he wasn't a fine second baseman in the minors.  What's the deal?

1.  I have no desire whatsoever for Burke to fail.  My topic header mocks those who believe, on the basis of one HR, he should be an everyday player.

2.  The descriptions I've heard was that he was adequate, at best, at 2b in the minors.

3.  He has no business playing SS on a regular basis.  The difference between him and Everett is drastic.

[NeilT]

1.  Burke probably will be an everyday player, for the Astros, at 2d. Next year. Meantime he'll get at bats where he gets them, including at shortstop.

2.  I'll defer that to the guys who've watched the minors.  My impression is that Burke's was a fine defensive second baseman, and that the problem with Burke was largely offense at Round Rock.

3.  Don't listen to talk radio.

[MusicMan]

Quote:
3.  Don't listen to talk radio.

Not a talk radio estimate.  This is based on watching his arm in the field, listening to people who have watched a lot more RR games than me, and notable baseball slackers such as Gerry Hunsicker.

[NeilT]

No, I meant listening to people on talk radio say Chris Burke needs to replace Adam Everett.

As for the arm, you ever wonder if Chris Burke was part of a turf war in the Astros home office?  That there were exagerations going both ways?  Maybe I'm cynical, but Chris Burke got a head scout fired.  Meanwhile Purpura, who survived Hunsicker, seems to like him.  I dunno, but I'd guess there was some battling upstairs that centered on Burke, and it probably wasn't fair to Burke.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Quote:

Quote:
So completely ignoring the trip down menstrual lane taken by Music Man and Limey, I'm still baffled by the collective assumption--nay?  Shall I say it?  Desire--for Chris Burke to fail.  Burke played well in left last year.  He's shown some indication that he might be a fine hitter.  I haven't heard anyone say he wasn't a fine second baseman in the minors.  What's the deal?

I've always been confused about the derisive description often applied to him, 'Punch and Judy.' If all he hits are singles and doubles but he hits a shitload of them why is that bad? No one expects corner-type mashing out of the guy.

Derisive or constructive criticism?  You're right, there is nothing wrong with  hitting singles and doubles, especially if one hits a "shitload".  I don't think anyone on this team (or in this forum) faulted that.  The cricism of Burke on offense is that he tends to drag his bat thru the strike zone resulting in push shots to the right side.  That works in the minors not  in the majors.  Second, he hits with very little power.  This was a problem last year.  Last year they were asking him to play LF fulltime.  The Astros, as constructed last year and this year, need power from LF.  If they don't get some slugging production, something equivalent to Lane (i.e. Preston Wilson???), the offense sputters unless someone goes on a streak.  

You have to ask the question, how many hitters can a team have that only hit singles?  It's a fun theory that a team can "single another team to death" but it doesn't work in reality.  Setting aside recent performance, it would be a huge surprise if Burke continued on his current tear.  But it would be a pleasant one.  So, it's not really "derision" so much as honest criticism that led several people who watched him in the minors question whether he would succeed, and therefore help the Astros, in the majors.

The knock on his defense applied to his footwork and suspect arm strength.  So far, nothing has occurred to truly test that assessment.  However, everything else pointed out about his play has been true so it's hard to second guess the insight provided.

[NeilT]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
So completely ignoring the trip down menstrual lane taken by Music Man and Limey, I'm still baffled by the collective assumption--nay?  Shall I say it?  Desire--for Chris Burke to fail.  Burke played well in left last year.  He's shown some indication that he might be a fine hitter.  I haven't heard anyone say he wasn't a fine second baseman in the minors.  What's the deal?

I've always been confused about the derisive description often applied to him, 'Punch and Judy.' If all he hits are singles and doubles but he hits a shitload of them why is that bad? No one expects corner-type mashing out of the guy.

Derisive or constructive criticism?  You're right, there is nothing wrong with  hitting singles and doubles, especially if one hits a "shitload".  I don't think anyone on this team (or in this forum) faulted that.  The cricism of Burke on offense is that he tends to drag his bat thru the strike zone resulting in push shots to the right side.  That works in the minors not  in the majors.  Second, he hits with very little power.  This was a problem last year.  Last year they were asking him to play LF fulltime.  The Astros, as constructed last year and this year, need power from LF.  If they don't get some slugging production, something equivalent to Lane (i.e. Preston Wilson???), the offense sputters unless someone goes on a streak.  

You have to ask the question, how many hitters can a team have that only hit singles?  It's a fun theory that a team can "single another team to death" but it doesn't work in reality.  Setting aside recent performance, it would be a huge surprise if Burke continued on his current tear.  But it would be a pleasant one.  So, it's not really "derision" so much as honest criticism that led several people who watched him in the minors question whether he would succeed, and therefore help the Astros, in the majors.

The knock on his defense applied to his footwork and suspect arm strength.  So far, nothing has occurred to truly test that assessment.  However, everything else pointed out about his play has been true so it's hard to second guess the insight provided.

Tom,

Bullshit.  If any other player on the Astros was derided the way Burke's derided, folks here would go to war.  From what I can tell, Burke had a year-and-a-half or so at Round Rock, which are generally considered his worst years in the minors  and possibly aberrations.  He had a good year in New Orleans in which he hit for some power.  He had last year in the majors, in which he played good defense in left and hit inclonclusively, but some months hit for average and some months for power and some months didn't hit at all.  Now that's all by memory, so if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

Right now he's had 25 ab.  That's about 1/3 of the abs of the regular rotation, but it's not chopped liver.  out of that, he's got 11 hits, so he's hitting .440.  of those 11 hits, 6 were doubles and 1 was a home run, so his .slg is .800, which for this brief wee moment in time is higher than Berkman's or Ensberg's.  Why am I supposed to rag on this guy for starting at SS?  One evening?  Yeah, his avg will drop.  yeah, his slg. will drop, but the Burke knocks are just strange, and don't seem to have much to do with his play on the field.

[Andyzipp]

Quote:

Why am I supposed to rag on this guy for starting at SS?  

Because how he hits has nothing to do with how he plays shortstop.  SS = most important defensive position.  Burke doesn't have the arm nor the footwork to play there everyday.  If he has to, it will cost the Astros games.

Since he is only a singles hitter, there's no way he'll produce more runs than he saves.  That's the problem with Burke at short.

Just because you don't see it doesn't make it less true.

[JJxvi]

A guy with 7 extra base hits and 4 singles is a singles hitter?

[NeilT]

Quote:

Quote:

Why am I supposed to rag on this guy for starting at SS?  

Because how he hits has nothing to do with how he plays shortstop.  SS = most important defensive position.  Burke doesn't have the arm nor the footwork to play there everyday.  If he has to, it will cost the Astros games.

Since he is only a singles hitter, there's no way he'll produce more runs than he saves.  That's the problem with Burke at short.

Just because you don't see it doesn't make it less true.

Well, again, nobody expects him to take over from short from Everett.  He's going to be playing short while Everett's out.  Why rag the guy?

Too bad he's only a singles hitter, otherwise he'd be a great defensive shortstop.

[JimR]

bullshit, Neil. you are approaching being out of your league. did you see his error? tell me how that looked to you. was it a difficult play? did he have enough arm? how about his footwork on that play--was it good?

Burke is valuable as a utility player and he might be a good every day 2B. he is a liability at SS.

people who derided Burke on here watched him play over 100 games. he has done well at Houston so far; good for him. he has a weak arm, and he is a singles/doubles hitter. that is all he will ever be, and i hope someone who loves him as much as you do offers a really good pitcher for him.

[JJxvi]

The guy has about 400 ML PAs right now and if you expand what have basically been pretty mediocre numbers (.250, .315, .383) you still end up with 37 doubles, 3 triples, and 8 homeruns per 600 PAs. Those are hardly punch and judy numbers for a .250 batting average player who's natural position is 2nd base.

[mihoba]

Quote:
The guy has about 400 ML PAs right now and if you expand what have basically been pretty mediocre numbers (.250, .315, .383) you still end up with 37 doubles, 3 triples, and 8 homeruns per 600 PAs. Those are hardly punch and judy numbers for a .250 batting average player who's natural position is 2nd base.

a .383 slugging is punch and judy. Of course, Burke's game should be speed, not power. He was a stopgap measure in LF last year. I agree with Jim, a good utility player who might improve enough to become a good secondbaseman for the Astros, but he has a hard act to follow in that position.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
So completely ignoring the trip down menstrual lane taken by Music Man and Limey, I'm still baffled by the collective assumption--nay?  Shall I say it?  Desire--for Chris Burke to fail.  Burke played well in left last year.  He's shown some indication that he might be a fine hitter.  I haven't heard anyone say he wasn't a fine second baseman in the minors.  What's the deal?

I've always been confused about the derisive description often applied to him, 'Punch and Judy.' If all he hits are singles and doubles but he hits a shitload of them why is that bad? No one expects corner-type mashing out of the guy.

Derisive or constructive criticism?  You're right, there is nothing wrong with  hitting singles and doubles, especially if one hits a "shitload".  I don't think anyone on this team (or in this forum) faulted that.  The cricism of Burke on offense is that he tends to drag his bat thru the strike zone resulting in push shots to the right side.  That works in the minors not  in the majors.  Second, he hits with very little power.  This was a problem last year.  Last year they were asking him to play LF fulltime.  The Astros, as constructed last year and this year, need power from LF.  If they don't get some slugging production, something equivalent to Lane (i.e. Preston Wilson???), the offense sputters unless someone goes on a streak.  

You have to ask the question, how many hitters can a team have that only hit singles?  It's a fun theory that a team can "single another team to death" but it doesn't work in reality.  Setting aside recent performance, it would be a huge surprise if Burke continued on his current tear.  But it would be a pleasant one.  So, it's not really "derision" so much as honest criticism that led several people who watched him in the minors question whether he would succeed, and therefore help the Astros, in the majors.

The knock on his defense applied to his footwork and suspect arm strength.  So far, nothing has occurred to truly test that assessment.  However, everything else pointed out about his play has been true so it's hard to second guess the insight provided.

Tom,

Bullshit.  If any other player on the Astros was derided the way Burke's derided, folks here would go to war.  From what I can tell, Burke had a year-and-a-half or so at Round Rock, which are generally considered his worst years in the minors  and possibly aberrations.  He had a good year in New Orleans in which he hit for some power.  He had last year in the majors, in which he played good defense in left and hit inclonclusively, but some months hit for average and some months for power and some months didn't hit at all.  Now that's all by memory, so if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

Right now he's had 25 ab.  That's about 1/3 of the abs of the regular rotation, but it's not chopped liver.  out of that, he's got 11 hits, so he's hitting .440.  of those 11 hits, 6 were doubles and 1 was a home run, so his .slg is .800, which for this brief wee moment in time is higher than Berkman's or Ensberg's.  Why am I supposed to rag on this guy for starting at SS?  One evening?  Yeah, his avg will drop.  yeah, his slg. will drop, but the Burke knocks are just strange, and don't seem to have much to do with his play on the field.

I'm not going to get into a statistics debate but what you described regarding last year was the streaks that comprised his season.  Overall, looking at the stats from last year, you can see he hit .248/.309/.368. Those are less than stellar numbers.  Did he hit homeruns?  Yeah, I can think of one memorable one, specifically.  Did he hit in key situations?  Yes, the homerun is one example of several.  Does that alter the fact that of his 79 hits, 53 were singles and adding his doubles (19) you account for all but 7 of his hits?  Where's the derision?  It looks like fact to me.

You are missing the point.  He may have been superb in LF, which I think he was.  But the Astros are not looking for superb defense in LF.  They are looking for slugging.  Hey, I could be wrong, I'm no inbreed (if I were would I know???) and don't expect you to outright agree with me.  But the fact that Houston proceeded to sign Wilson when the opportunity arose, leads me to believe I'm right.  They had Burke available to start the season.  They chose to use him in a utility role instead.  Is he starting out hot?  Hell YEAH!!! And I love it!  The better the performance Houston gets from role players, the better the team.  Again, where's the derision?  

We aren't all Jim (not that I take all his comments on Burke all that seriously, outside the critiquing) so loathing and derision don't necessarily factor into it.  All that said, it's still 25 ABs!  At season end, if he's still tearing it up, we can all exhale a huge sigh of relief because the heir to 2B is proving to be worthy.  What I will agree with is the tendency, and I did this too,  to portray Burke as the Mud'n Blood Messiah (to resurrect a term!).  He's not.  And I think some posters, such as Jim and Jacksonian, took issue to the hype and blind faith the masses put into that conclusion.  If that's derision, well, WFW.

p.s.  Does the fact that you figured out my first name make my point any more valuable?  I'm still struggling with Lopez's point there.  Obviously I'm not a Major (stole that from a David Bowie song).

[toddthebod]

My wife made me go out last night and I didn't get a chance to see the game.  How was Burke's defense?  Yes, I know that he made an error, did he have other opportunities?  How did he look in those chances?  Were there any double play opportunities?  How were those handled?

By the way, "Friends with Money" is a pretty good movie.

[JJxvi]

Tough to say what that slugging percentage makes him . Craig Biggio only slugged over .383 in one out of his first 4 full season in the major leagues...

[MusicMan]

Quote:
Obviously I'm not a Major (stole that from a David Bowie song).

Shit, there goes my whole world view.

Was General Admission not really a general???

[mihoba]

Quote:
My wife made me go out last night and I didn't get a chance to see the game.  

Bush league, no doubt.

[MikeyBoy]

Quote:
The guy has about 400 ML PAs right now and if you expand what have basically been pretty mediocre numbers (.250, .315, .383) you still end up with 37 doubles, 3 triples, and 8 homeruns per 600 PAs. Those are hardly punch and judy numbers for a .250 batting average player who's natural position is 2nd base.

Don't overlook the contributions speed made to those doubles and triples. Burke has some nice things going for him as a baseball player; speed, pitch recognition, base running, but power is not one of them. Also, from the small amount of time I have seen of him at second base, his defensive abilities are definately lacking and not just arm, which has become the popular while overly simplistic description of his deficiencies, but also his glove and reads on the ball, as well.

[NeilT]

Quote:
bullshit, Neil. you are approaching being out of your league. did you see his error? tell me how that looked to you. was it a difficult play? did he have enough arm? how about his footwork on that play--was it good?

Burke is valuable as a utility player and he might be a good every day 2B. he is a liability at SS.

people who derided Burke on here watched him play over 100 games. he has done well at Houston so far; good for him. he has a weak arm, and he is a singles/doubles hitter. that is all he will ever be, and i hope someone who loves him as much as you do offers a really good pitcher for him.

No doubt I'm way out of my league.  I saw the error.  It looked to me like he had pretty good range, a pretty good glove, and made a throw before he set, but didn't have time to set.  The throw bounced, and bounced off Berkman's glove.  Was it an error, yeah, though for some shortstops it would have been a single.  Was it a throw that Everett would have made?  Probably.  Would Everett have made the stop better?  I don't know.

[MikeyBoy]

Quote:
How was Burke's defense?  Yes, I know that he made an error, did he have other opportunities?  How did he look in those chances?  Were there any double play opportunities?  How were those handled?

It's hard to get a good feel on TV, because the camera follows the ball, but he didn't get too many chances at grounders. However, he was out of position on a cut-off throw and he went to the wrong base on a relay, but those can be chalked up as rust. I didn't see the error.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
did you see his error? tell me how that looked to you. was it a difficult play? did he have enough arm? how about his footwork on that play--was it good?

It was horrible.  It was understandable why Burke handled what is usually a typical play for good shortstop the way he did.  It's called compensation.  When they would put me at shortstop, ill-advised as it were, because of emergency... I would cheat.  Anyone who plays or has played baseball knows what "cheat" means, but suffice it to say, in order for Burke to compensate for his lack of fundamentally sound ability at short, he cheats.  That play is one where his quickness, speed and range got him to the ball... easily.  Then it all fell apart for him.  1) He transfered the ball quickly to his throwing hand (good) and then 2) did not bother to set himself (bad... but understandable if you're trying to cheat or compensate) and then 3) threw the ball off the wrong foot, never once squaring himself to the bag for accuracy (very bad).   That play fell apart when it should never have done if Burke had a major league shortstop's arm to stop-set-throw properly.  That he threw the ball the way he did tells you a lot about his arm or lack thereof.  As for his footwork, I think it's more a product of his arm strength not being there for throws in the deep part of the shortstop area.  At second base though, his footwork is a product of his unfamiliarity with the position.  Given time, I think his footwork around the second base area will be fine and he'll do less cheating and let the game come to him more naturally.

Quote:
Burke is valuable as a utility player and he might be a good every day 2B. he is a liability at SS.

His ability to play shortstop in the majors is not in doubt, he can't do it on an everyday basis.  It's sort of like Craig Biggio playing centerfield.

Quote:
people who derided Burke on here watched him play over 100 games. he has done well at Houston so far; good for him. he has a weak arm, and he is a singles/doubles hitter. that is all he will ever be, and i hope someone who loves him as much as you do offers a really good pitcher for him.

He is showing a much quicker bat than I've seen in the past.  The work they've put in with him at Instructional League is paying off I see.  But if people saw the Chris Burke of 2001 in Round Rock, they would've been very dissappointed indeed with the punch and judy act on a daily basis.  Weak pop-ups to right field almost every at bat was not making anyone feel good about his chances as a major leaguer.

Good to see he's getting his bat through the zone quicker and keeping his hands in the proper posiition.  By the way, what Burke was doing when he was woeful in the minors was swinging at pitches as if he was still using an aluminium bat.  He was getting beat up a lot by the pitchers in the pros because he just couldn't adjust well to using a wood bat and using his hands more than he was used to.  At Instructional League, they taught him how to use his hands, but they also knew the promise they had for him being a power guy like he was at the University of Tennessee would probably be a thing of the past due to this change.  Burke has done well enough, but all the talk that went on in here and of course by the media hype ("Get rid of Kent, bring up Burke!" - Pinwheel Justice, circa 2004) was puzzling to say the least, given how folks thought he was a legit prospect with power in his game.

Perplexing, even now when you watch his game developing into a nice player, but not the next HOF to be like Biggio.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Was it an error, yeah, though for some shortstops it would have been a single.  Was it a throw that Everett would have made?  Probably.  Would Everett have made the stop better?  I don't know.

I don't know if we watched the same play given what you just said here.

[JimR]

your conclusions tell me that you never saw the play.

[JJxvi]

 

Quote:
Perplexing, even now when you watch his game developing into a nice player, but not the next HOF to be like Biggio.  

I am curious what expectations were for Craig Biggio when he was 26 years old. He was obviously already a starter and had been in the major leagues for 3+ years at that point. I guess in 1992 (26 years old) he became an all-star for the second straight year, but his numbers at that point were not particularly impressive like they were to become in 1993. A handful of homeruns per year, about 20+ doubles or so per season. Good speed. Lots of singles and decent plate discipline.  The criteria for great offense has certainly changed a lot, it seems, since then.

[mihoba]

 

Quote:
The criteria for great offense has certainly changed a lot, it seems, since then.  

So has the ballpark.

[JJxvi]

True.

[NeilT]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
So completely ignoring the trip down menstrual lane taken by Music Man and Limey, I'm still baffled by the collective assumption--nay?  Shall I say it?  Desire--for Chris Burke to fail.  Burke played well in left last year.  He's shown some indication that he might be a fine hitter.  I haven't heard anyone say he wasn't a fine second baseman in the minors.  What's the deal?

I've always been confused about the derisive description often applied to him, 'Punch and Judy.' If all he hits are singles and doubles but he hits a shitload of them why is that bad? No one expects corner-type mashing out of the guy.

Derisive or constructive criticism?  You're right, there is nothing wrong with  hitting singles and doubles, especially if one hits a "shitload".  I don't think anyone on this team (or in this forum) faulted that.  The cricism of Burke on offense is that he tends to drag his bat thru the strike zone resulting in push shots to the right side.  That works in the minors not  in the majors.  Second, he hits with very little power.  This was a problem last year.  Last year they were asking him to play LF fulltime.  The Astros, as constructed last year and this year, need power from LF.  If they don't get some slugging production, something equivalent to Lane (i.e. Preston Wilson???), the offense sputters unless someone goes on a streak.  

You have to ask the question, how many hitters can a team have that only hit singles?  It's a fun theory that a team can "single another team to death" but it doesn't work in reality.  Setting aside recent performance, it would be a huge surprise if Burke continued on his current tear.  But it would be a pleasant one.  So, it's not really "derision" so much as honest criticism that led several people who watched him in the minors question whether he would succeed, and therefore help the Astros, in the majors.

The knock on his defense applied to his footwork and suspect arm strength.  So far, nothing has occurred to truly test that assessment.  However, everything else pointed out about his play has been true so it's hard to second guess the insight provided.

Tom,

Bullshit.  If any other player on the Astros was derided the way Burke's derided, folks here would go to war.  From what I can tell, Burke had a year-and-a-half or so at Round Rock, which are generally considered his worst years in the minors  and possibly aberrations.  He had a good year in New Orleans in which he hit for some power.  He had last year in the majors, in which he played good defense in left and hit inclonclusively, but some months hit for average and some months for power and some months didn't hit at all.  Now that's all by memory, so if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

Right now he's had 25 ab.  That's about 1/3 of the abs of the regular rotation, but it's not chopped liver.  out of that, he's got 11 hits, so he's hitting .440.  of those 11 hits, 6 were doubles and 1 was a home run, so his .slg is .800, which for this brief wee moment in time is higher than Berkman's or Ensberg's.  Why am I supposed to rag on this guy for starting at SS?  One evening?  Yeah, his avg will drop.  yeah, his slg. will drop, but the Burke knocks are just strange, and don't seem to have much to do with his play on the field.

I'm not going to get into a statistics debate but what you described regarding last year was the streaks that comprised his season.  Overall, looking at the stats from last year, you can see he hit .248/.309/.368. Those are less than stellar numbers.  Did he hit homeruns?  Yeah, I can think of one memorable one, specifically.  Did he hit in key situations?  Yes, the homerun is one example of several.  Does that alter the fact that of his 79 hits, 53 were singles and adding his doubles (19) you account for all but 7 of his hits?  Where's the derision?  It looks like fact to me.

You are missing the point.  He may have been superb in LF, which I think he was.  But the Astros are not looking for superb defense in LF.  They are looking for slugging.  Hey, I could be wrong, I'm no inbreed (if I were would I know???) and don't expect you to outright agree with me.  But the fact that Houston proceeded to sign Wilson when the opportunity arose, leads me to believe I'm right.  They had Burke available to start the season.  They chose to use him in a utility role instead.  Is he starting out hot?  Hell YEAH!!! And I love it!  The better the performance Houston gets from role players, the better the team.  Again, where's the derision?  

We aren't all Jim (not that I take all his comments on Burke all that seriously, outside the critiquing) so loathing and derision don't necessarily factor into it.  All that said, it's still 25 ABs!  At season end, if he's still tearing it up, we can all exhale a huge sigh of relief because the heir to 2B is proving to be worthy.  What I will agree with is the tendency, and I did this too,  to portray Burke as the Mud'n Blood Messiah (to resurrect a term!).  He's not.  And I think some posters, such as Jim and Jacksonian, took issue to the hype and blind faith the masses put into that conclusion.  If that's derision, well, WFW.

p.s.  Does the fact that you figured out my first name make my point any more valuable?  I'm still struggling with Lopez's point there.  Obviously I'm not a Major (stole that from a David Bowie song).

As for derision, I think I was talking about the first set of posts in this thread.  It's the sort of tone usually reserved for failing left-handed relief pitchers, not a guy who seems to be playing hard. I don't think I'm missing the point, though. Burke hit pretty inconclusively last year, but there were some glimpses of good hitting.  He's started out this year hitting well, and we all hope that continues. He will not replace Adam Everett permanently at SS, though he seems to be Everett's backup. Second base post-Biggio is his to lose.  Fair assessment?

[Jacksonian]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
So completely ignoring the trip down menstrual lane taken by Music Man and Limey, I'm still baffled by the collective assumption--nay?  Shall I say it?  Desire--for Chris Burke to fail.  Burke played well in left last year.  He's shown some indication that he might be a fine hitter.  I haven't heard anyone say he wasn't a fine second baseman in the minors.  What's the deal?

I've always been confused about the derisive description often applied to him, 'Punch and Judy.' If all he hits are singles and doubles but he hits a shitload of them why is that bad? No one expects corner-type mashing out of the guy.

Derisive or constructive criticism?  You're right, there is nothing wrong with  hitting singles and doubles, especially if one hits a "shitload".  I don't think anyone on this team (or in this forum) faulted that.  The cricism of Burke on offense is that he tends to drag his bat thru the strike zone resulting in push shots to the right side.  That works in the minors not  in the majors.  Second, he hits with very little power.  This was a problem last year.  Last year they were asking him to play LF fulltime.  The Astros, as constructed last year and this year, need power from LF.  If they don't get some slugging production, something equivalent to Lane (i.e. Preston Wilson???), the offense sputters unless someone goes on a streak.  

You have to ask the question, how many hitters can a team have that only hit singles?  It's a fun theory that a team can "single another team to death" but it doesn't work in reality.  Setting aside recent performance, it would be a huge surprise if Burke continued on his current tear.  But it would be a pleasant one.  So, it's not really "derision" so much as honest criticism that led several people who watched him in the minors question whether he would succeed, and therefore help the Astros, in the majors.

The knock on his defense applied to his footwork and suspect arm strength.  So far, nothing has occurred to truly test that assessment.  However, everything else pointed out about his play has been true so it's hard to second guess the insight provided.

Tom,

Bullshit.  If any other player on the Astros was derided the way Burke's derided, folks here would go to war.  From what I can tell, Burke had a year-and-a-half or so at Round Rock, which are generally considered his worst years in the minors  and possibly aberrations.  He had a good year in New Orleans in which he hit for some power.  He had last year in the majors, in which he played good defense in left and hit inclonclusively, but some months hit for average and some months for power and some months didn't hit at all.  Now that's all by memory, so if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

Right now he's had 25 ab.  That's about 1/3 of the abs of the regular rotation, but it's not chopped liver.  out of that, he's got 11 hits, so he's hitting .440.  of those 11 hits, 6 were doubles and 1 was a home run, so his .slg is .800, which for this brief wee moment in time is higher than Berkman's or Ensberg's.  Why am I supposed to rag on this guy for starting at SS?  One evening?  Yeah, his avg will drop.  yeah, his slg. will drop, but the Burke knocks are just strange, and don't seem to have much to do with his play on the field.

I'm not going to get into a statistics debate but what you described regarding last year was the streaks that comprised his season.  Overall, looking at the stats from last year, you can see he hit .248/.309/.368. Those are less than stellar numbers.  Did he hit homeruns?  Yeah, I can think of one memorable one, specifically.  Did he hit in key situations?  Yes, the homerun is one example of several.  Does that alter the fact that of his 79 hits, 53 were singles and adding his doubles (19) you account for all but 7 of his hits?  Where's the derision?  It looks like fact to me.

You are missing the point.  He may have been superb in LF, which I think he was.  But the Astros are not looking for superb defense in LF.  They are looking for slugging.  Hey, I could be wrong, I'm no inbreed (if I were would I know???) and don't expect you to outright agree with me.  But the fact that Houston proceeded to sign Wilson when the opportunity arose, leads me to believe I'm right.  They had Burke available to start the season.  They chose to use him in a utility role instead.  Is he starting out hot?  Hell YEAH!!! And I love it!  The better the performance Houston gets from role players, the better the team.  Again, where's the derision?  

We aren't all Jim (not that I take all his comments on Burke all that seriously, outside the critiquing) so loathing and derision don't necessarily factor into it.  All that said, it's still 25 ABs!  At season end, if he's still tearing it up, we can all exhale a huge sigh of relief because the heir to 2B is proving to be worthy.  What I will agree with is the tendency, and I did this too,  to portray Burke as the Mud'n Blood Messiah (to resurrect a term!).  He's not.  And I think some posters, such as Jim and Jacksonian, took issue to the hype and blind faith the masses put into that conclusion.  If that's derision, well, WFW.

I think to some extent Burke has been a kind of victim from the outset.  He was the 10th pick in a very mediocre draft class.  If he'd been in last year's class (the Astros drafted Bogusevic) he likely would not have gone until the supplemental first round and perhaps more likely the second round.  Unfortunately, Lakey and others pronounced Burke fit to play short.  He did have a bit of a prima donna attitude for a while, but I'm not hearing that's the case anymore.  So, Burke's saddled with the expectations of a high draft pick and, IMO, high hype based on poor scouting plus some earlier attitude issues.  But, yes, I don't think we'd have this thread if Burke were not a high level draft pick.

I think Burke is doing and has done everything the Astros have asked of him and he should be applauded for it.  If Everett hadn't been injured Burke would have been on the bench last night.  Garner wanted Burke's bat in the lineup more than he wanted Bruntlett's defense on the field.  That's life.  Folks on this board who disagree have no problem doing so.  I haven't read a post disagreeing with Garner's decision, except maybe Limey.  Turns out Burke's hot bat made a difference and the ball rarely found him at short.  Good for the Astros.

For me the Burke whining is tiresome.  He's not pretty on the field, but we all know that and there really isn't any reason to continue to bemoan it.  As long as he does what he's asked though I won't complain about him.  No, he's not good enough to be an everyday ss as everyone on this board should know.  But, everything I hear says the Astros brass still think he's going to be the Astros second baseman after Biggio unless someone superior, in the Astros estimation, comes along.  Right now there is no one in the minors that rises to that level.

[Limey]

Quote:
So completely ignoring the trip down menstrual lane taken by Music Man and Limey, I'm still baffled by the collective assumption--nay?  Shall I say it?  Desire--for Chris Burke to fail.  Burke played well in left last year.  He's shown some indication that he might be a fine hitter.  I haven't heard anyone say he wasn't a fine second baseman in the minors.  What's the deal?

I don't want him to fail.  I simply don't expect him to be the second coming of A-Rod.  Or even Ricky G.

[JimR]

calling Burke a "victim" is so laughable that i am surprised that someone like you said it.

[pravata]

What looked odd to me was that he took the time to take a couple steps to get behind the ball, yet when he threw he was still moving to his left, instead of forward.  He says he rushed it.  The throw definitely, but he took the time to try to set up correctly.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:
calling Burke a "victim" is so laughable that i am surprised that someone like you said it.

I understand what you're saying and I thought long about whether to use it.  Victim is probably too strong, but I went with it.  Perhaps I should have said fans were a misled by the hype machine created by certain members of the 2001 Astros org and many in the media.  Labeling Burke the next Biggio before even his first professional at-bat was ludicrous.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I am curious what expectations were for Craig Biggio when he was 26 years old.

I don't remember, but he came out of Seaton Hall as one of five great hitters on the team.  There is a book about the team Biggio played for at SH and how four of the five became pretty damn good hitters in the major leagues.

Biggio is the HOF to be amongst them.

Quote:
He was obviously already a starter and had been in the major leagues for 3+ years at that point. I guess in 1992 (26 years old) he became an all-star for the second straight year, but his numbers at that point were not particularly impressive like they were to become in 1993.

Numbers?  Who mentioned Burke's numbers as an indicator that he has flaws in terms of power?  I didn't.

Quote:
A handful of homeruns per year, about 20+ doubles or so per season. Good speed. Lots of singles and decent plate discipline.  The criteria for great offense has certainly changed a lot, it seems, since then.

You missed it.  Doubles and gap power in the minors usually translate into power in the majors because a guy's body will mature more and more and the ability to perform increases with each plate appearance.  But it begins with having a quick enough bat, good plate discipline and just a knack for hitting the ball at this level.  Often you'll hear scouts talk about the "sound the ball makes coming off his bat"... meaning these guys are very good at squaring up a pitch, no matter what type of pitch it is.  Most major leaguers can hit mistake pitches.

The best ones hit good pitchers pitches as well.  Burke has not been impressive like Biggio was when he started his career in terms of being the type of hitter who had all the essentials for becoming what he eventually became.  Burke is nice, he'll have a pretty good career.  Heck, he may even become a better hitter than I expect.

But he's not the second coming, and that *right there* is the big problem with the hype.  Nothing personal against Burke, it's all against the hype.  Why the hype if you can easily see that it doesn't fit.

If the hype don't fit, then it's not legit.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
calling Burke a "victim" is so laughable that i am surprised that someone like you said it.

I understand what you're saying and I thought long about whether to use it.  Victim is probably too strong, but I went with it.  Perhaps I should have said fans were a misled by the hype machine created by certain members of the 2001 Astros org and many in the media.  Labeling Burke the next Biggio before even his first professional at-bat was ludicrous.

BINGO!  Saying anyone here is against Burke personally is a huge error in understanding.  It is *ALL* against the hype.

[JJxvi]

 

Quote:
Numbers? Who mentioned Burke's numbers as an indicator that he has flaws in terms of power? I didn't.

Nobody. But numbers are all I really have for 22-25 year old Biggio. I was 8-11 years old at the time, and while I was a huge fan and saw him play a lot, I dont exactly remember the details too well.

It WAS mentioned that Burke's relatively high number of doubles was likely keyed to his speed earlier in this thread and not necessarily a product of power. Biggio had great speed also and actually hit fewer doubles than Burke at roughly the same age (Burke has a double every 10.9 ABs Biggio had one double every 22.5 ABs, Burke has an extra base hit every 10.9 ABs in his career and Biggio had one every 15.6 Abs at the same age.)

I cant really go back and see the difference with how much authority and pop each player hit the baseball with in the minor leagues and early in their careers. I'm hoping someone here can.  I have seen nothing in Burke's major league ABs that tells me he can't hit for decent middle infielder power later in his career.

Is Chris Burke less likely to develop power than Craig Biggio was? Obviously in hindsight we know Biggio was destined to be a great one, but what about the book on him when he was Burke's age?

Actually, this kind of proves someone else's point...the only way Burke was really screwed is being destined to always be compared to Craig Biggio. Theres really no way he could ever come out looking good.

[JJxvi]

 

Quote:
The best ones hit good pitchers pitches as well. Burke has not been impressive like Biggio was when he started his career in terms of being the type of hitter who had all the essentials for becoming what he eventually became. Burke is nice, he'll have a pretty good career. Heck, he may even become a better hitter than I expect.
 

Thanks!

[jasonact]

Quote:
Obviously I'm not a Major (stole that from a David Bowie song).

I honestly thought you took it from  the cocktail, which is pretty good.

[NeilT]

Quote:
your conclusions tell me that you never saw the play.

So he showed no range, no glove, had ample time to set and throw, and no first baseman would have made the pick?  I guess I missed it then.

[JimR]

you have turned into someone who would rather be pissy than anything else. you are very good at that. read Noe's post again. the play required no great range, and he got to it. he did not have enough arm to make the throw, and he threw on the run off the wrong foot because he knew he did not have enough arm. he rushed it and make a horrible throw. he also got three hits, which i'm sure makes him a good SS to you.

[MRaup]

I just watched the play again on MLB.tv, and saying that he couldn't have set his feet and thrown the guy out is not exactly correct. Berkman had the ball go off his glove as he tried to dig it, and the runner was still at least one full step is not two from the bag. Burke sets his feet and delivers a strong throw, the guy is either out by half a step, or at least out on a bang-bang play, assuming he makes the throw with his feet set.

And begrudging Berkman for not digging that ball is not fair at all. Berkman has been above average to awesome at first so far, when it comes to digging throws out of the dirt. Simply saying that Bagwell would've dug that one is not really fair or true.

[MRaup]

Also, he shortarmed the hell out of the ball, almost looked like a shot-put throw.

[chuck]

Quote:
BINGO!  Saying anyone here is against Burke personally is a huge error in understanding.  It is *ALL* against the hype.

This is useful to know, thanks, and something that has not been at all obvious to me from where I sit.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Quote:

Quote:
BINGO!  Saying anyone here is against Burke personally is a huge error in understanding.  It is *ALL* against the hype.

This is useful to know, thanks, and something that has not been at all obvious to me from where I sit.

Stick around.  It may not be apparent but this site is far from being locked into "group think" or player bashing.  Ripping, deriding, or loathing a player may happen, but it's usually reactionary.  This is the only place you'll find someone who might say something nice about David Weathers!  Just don't mention Miceli around some people.  Not everyone has moved past the 2004 NLCS yet....

[rifraft]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
BINGO!  Saying anyone here is against Burke personally is a huge error in understanding.  It is *ALL* against the hype.

This is useful to know, thanks, and something that has not been at all obvious to me from where I sit.

Stick around.  It may not be apparent but this site is far from being locked into "group think" or player bashing.  Ripping, deriding, or loathing a player may happen, but it's usually reactionary.  This is the only place you'll find someone who might say something nice about David Weathers!  Just don't mention Miceli around some people.  Not everyone has moved past the 2004 NLCS yet....

You know what's amazing, the missile was cut from his Japanese league team last year, and now he's closing games for the D-Rays.  I find that funny for some reason.

[BizidyDizidy]

Quote:
Stick around.  It may not be apparent but this site is far from being locked into "group think" or player bashing.  Ripping, deriding, or loathing a player may happen, but it's usually reactionary.  This is the only place you'll find someone who might say something nice about David Weathers!  Just don't mention Miceli around some people.  Not everyone has moved past the 2004 NLCS yet....

Just so no one is confused, most positive comments about him involved him harpooning the marlins after we dumped his grand-slam giving up ass.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
This is useful to know, thanks, and something that has not been at all obvious to me from where I sit.

Where do you sit?

Obviously, if personal vitrol for a player were the issue of the day around here, we'd start an online petition to have Uncle Drayton get rid of the player.  I don't think anyone here has every started or even condoned a fan-based, grass roots effort to make decisions on players, managers and even owners for the Houston Astros or anyone in the mlb.

Have you?

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Nobody. But numbers are all I really have for 22-25 year old Biggio. I was 8-11 years old at the time, and while I was a huge fan and saw him play a lot, I dont exactly remember the details too well.

Understandable, but to make a conclusion with numbers only is dangerous to your argument.  Because if someone watched Biggio swing the bat at that stage of his career, they'd provide very good context for the lack of power that you seem to imply.  Plus, mihoba already provided some other context of the Astrodome.  Watching Biggio hit early in his career, the bat quickness was ungodly good.  I watched Burke hit in the minors at Round Rock and he got beat up inside quite often.  Lack of proper hitting mechanics were evident and is it any wonder to you that even while at AA, he had to go to Instructional League that winter for hitting instruction?  They had to breakdown his swing and rebuild it for him so he could use his hands better and make the adjustment to a major league quailty swing.  That he's done so is to his credit.  But everything that was power in his game in college was gone too because of the adjustments.  Will he hit for power?  I doubt it, but he'll be a nice major league player/hitter with the adjustment.  That much is true.

I don't hold on to the hype that was attached to Burke, it's not fair to the young man.

Quote:
It WAS mentioned that Burke's relatively high number of doubles was likely keyed to his speed earlier in this thread and not necessarily a product of power. Biggio had great speed also and actually hit fewer doubles than Burke at roughly the same age (Burke has a double every 10.9 ABs Biggio had one double every 22.5 ABs, Burke has an extra base hit every 10.9 ABs in his career and Biggio had one every 15.6 Abs at the same age.)

You make too quick assessments based on stats alone.  Don't do that.

Quote:
I cant really go back and see the difference with how much authority and pop each player hit the baseball with in the minor leagues and early in their careers. I'm hoping someone here can.  I have seen nothing in Burke's major league ABs that tells me he can't hit for decent middle infielder power later in his career.

Bat speed is the first indicator to look for.  How well he turns on an inside pitch, is he getting the bat sawed off his hands, so forth.  Then go from there.  Burke is trying to square the ball as much as he can, but right now, he's a nice player and not a future star based on how he's managed to adjust his game.  Can he improve even more?  I don't think so, but hopefully he proves me wrong.

Quote:
Is Chris Burke less likely to develop power than Craig Biggio was? Obviously in hindsight we know Biggio was destined to be a great one, but what about the book on him when he was Burke's age?

Go read up on Biggio then.  Google any article you want about the young man that was Biggio and you might get the information you covet.

Quote:
Actually, this kind of proves someone else's point...the only way Burke was really screwed is being destined to always be compared to Craig Biggio. Theres really no way he could ever come out looking good.

You were trying to compare him to Biggio, not I.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
This is useful to know, thanks, and something that has not been at all obvious to me from where I sit.

Where do you sit?

Obviously, if personal vitrol for a player were the issue of the day around here, we'd start an online petition to have Uncle Drayton get rid of the player.  I don't think anyone here has every started or even condoned a fan-based, grass roots effort to make decisions on players, managers and even owners for the Houston Astros or anyone in the mlb.

Have you?

Not so fast.  We'd need to see if anyone attended a game in June of 2001 in which Jay Powell pitched.  It wasn't online, but it was a fan based effort; misguided as it was.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
Stick around.  It may not be apparent but this site is far from being locked into "group think" or player bashing.  Ripping, deriding, or loathing a player may happen, but it's usually reactionary.  This is the only place you'll find someone who might say something nice about David Weathers!  Just don't mention Miceli around some people.  Not everyone has moved past the 2004 NLCS yet....

Just so no one is confused, most positive comments about him involved him harpooning the marlins after we dumped his grand-slam giving up ass.

And Dan Miceli was one of the big reasons that the Astros went on the tear they did down the stretch to make the playoffs in 2004.  Given up for dead at the All-Star break, miraculous turnaround in the second half.  Fans all praised Beltran (and rightfully so) for the second half surge, but rarely did anyone mention that Lance Berkman was actually the guy carrying the team on offense.  As far as pitching was concerned, Clemens and Oswalt carried the day, but Dan Miceli was the stallwart in the bullpen in August and September.

Yes, Dan Miceli.

Without Miceli's contributions to the cause (a team game), the Astros have a very hard time even sniffing the playoffs.

[BizidyDizidy]

I can't tell if you were with me or not, but I was talking about Weathers. I thought Miceli did a damn fine job.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
This is useful to know, thanks, and something that has not been at all obvious to me from where I sit.

Where do you sit?

Obviously, if personal vitrol for a player were the issue of the day around here, we'd start an online petition to have Uncle Drayton get rid of the player.  I don't think anyone here has every started or even condoned a fan-based, grass roots effort to make decisions on players, managers and even owners for the Houston Astros or anyone in the mlb.

Have you?

Not so fast.  We'd need to see if anyone attended a game in June of 2001 in which Jay Powell pitched.  It wasn't online, but it was a fan based effort; misguided as it was.

Good one!  Jay Powell was also abused unjustly by fans and media alike.  It was the Fat Bastard who eventually lashed out at the media and fans and told them "You don't understand baseball when you boo Jay Powell!".  Having a knee reconstructed Biggio at second base with absolutely no range getting no ground balls to his left or right hurts a groundball set-up man.  Powell started to try and strike everyone out instead of pitching his usual game of "get a ground ball, go sit down" game.

I go back to what I originally said though, it is the *HYPE* surrounding Burke that irks most who *WATCHED* him play coming up through the ranks.  It was and continues to be misquided and unfair, to fans and the kid alike.  You set up a player to fail miserably that way, and Burke doesn't deserve to be Ka-Powelled in his young career.

Trust what you're seeing, not what you've been hearing.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I can't tell if you were with me or not, but I was talking about Weathers. I thought Miceli did a damn fine job.

Yeah, I remember that game versus the Cubs.  Day game, Mark Prior was his opposing pitcher.  First game of a doubleheader.

Just wanted to add my Miceli missive as a tag to your good point on Weathers.

[Astroholic]

as I recall, Bagwell was also very strong in the second half of 2004.

[davek]

Quote:
I go back to what I originally said though, it is the *HYPE* surrounding Burke that irks most who *WATCHED* him play coming up through the ranks.  It was and continues to be misquided and unfair, to fans and the kid alike.  You set up a player to fail miserably that way, and Burke doesn't deserve to be Ka-Powelled in his young career.

Trust what you're seeing, not what you've been hearing.

Good thing they didn't hype that Ginter guy much...

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
as I recall, Bagwell was also very strong in the second half of 2004.

Yup.  Baggs and Berkman *WERE* the Houston Astros offense on a consistent basis.  Beltran, Lamb and several others provided memorable, timely hitting and of course Beltran then went on a tear during the post-season.  But to get them there, Baggs and Berkman's work was outstanding.

[NeilT]

Quote:
you have turned into someone who would rather be pissy than anything else. you are very good at that. read Noe's post again. the play required no great range, and he got to it. he did not have enough arm to make the throw, and he threw on the run off the wrong foot because he knew he did not have enough arm. he rushed it and make a horrible throw. he also got three hits, which i'm sure makes him a good SS to you.

WFW. You asked me what I saw.  I told you.  If I'm wrong, I'm good with that.   My point's never been that he was a good shortstop, only that he was playing shortstop last night, and probably Friday and Saturday.  What's the deal with bashing the guy?

Noe says we're not bashing him because of him, but because of hype.  Seems to me we got our own hype going.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
I go back to what I originally said though, it is the *HYPE* surrounding Burke that irks most who *WATCHED* him play coming up through the ranks.  It was and continues to be misquided and unfair, to fans and the kid alike.  You set up a player to fail miserably that way, and Burke doesn't deserve to be Ka-Powelled in his young career.

Trust what you're seeing, not what you've been hearing.

Good thing they didn't hype that Ginter guy much...

Next Craig Biggio, did they say? Oh boy... as is, seems every young prospect with any sort of attention that somehow leaves the organization is/was the next great thing.  As I recall, one website that rated prospects said Ginter was the next Marcus Giles.

John Buck, Colin Porter, Jason Alfaro... heck, Henri Stanley for crying out loud!  Those guys had some crying over them as Houston not knowing what they were letting go!  Buck may be the only one where a solid case could be made, but overall... most fans get involved in the hype moreso than the substance.

Hey, have I told you about Royce Huffman lately?  (And no, I'm not kidding!). How about Charlton Jimerson?  Remember Ryan Bowen from yester-year?  Yeah, I do!

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
you have turned into someone who would rather be pissy than anything else. you are very good at that. read Noe's post again. the play required no great range, and he got to it. he did not have enough arm to make the throw, and he threw on the run off the wrong foot because he knew he did not have enough arm. he rushed it and make a horrible throw. he also got three hits, which i'm sure makes him a good SS to you.

WFW. You asked me what I saw.  I told you.  If I'm wrong, I'm good with that.   My point's never been that he was a good shortstop, only that he was playing shortstop last night, and probably Friday and Saturday.  What's the deal with bashing the guy?

Noe says we're not bashing him because of him, but because of hype.  Seems to me we got our own hype going.

I honestly don't understand what is going on here with you and Jim, but overall, I have talked to Jim long enough to know his opinion is not based on any personal dislike for the young man.  Of that I can be real sure.

That Burke is used as an emergency shortstop does not mean that the misgivings about his ability to play the position are not real.  In fact, he continues to play the position with compensation/cheating in mind.  Heck, one of the better compensation players at that position is David Eckstein.  But Eckstein has at least mastered footwork to his benefit and thus taken some of the mystery for himself out of the equation.

Burke comes from playing the position at the college level where he could play up a little on a ball hit off the bat and have truer groundballs hit right at him.  Grass is different.  Wood bats are different.  The speed of a professional ballplayer is different.  All things that lead to exposure to Burke inability to play a true shortstop. Most of it centered on his arm.

Now he cheats.  Good for him, he's smart to use that to his advantage.  But don't try and sell me that he's a shortstop like anybody else (other than perhaps Eckstein).  Maybe Michael Young, but Young has more power to his offensive game than Burke.  Also has a stronger arm, but overall, that is the company Burke resides in.

Is that derisive to say that?  I think not.  I think it's fair to the young man.  It's unfair to the hype of greatness though.

[NeilT]

Quote:
I just watched the play again on MLB.tv, and saying that he couldn't have set his feet and thrown the guy out is not exactly correct. Berkman had the ball go off his glove as he tried to dig it, and the runner was still at least one full step is not two from the bag. Burke sets his feet and delivers a strong throw, the guy is either out by half a step, or at least out on a bang-bang play, assuming he makes the throw with his feet set.

And begrudging Berkman for not digging that ball is not fair at all. Berkman has been above average to awesome at first so far, when it comes to digging throws out of the dirt. Simply saying that Bagwell would've dug that one is not really fair or true.

I watched the play only as it occurred.  Noe's comment that he rushed the play sounds right, and Noe's description of the play sounds good and true.  I'm not criticizing Berkman, either, only saying that it was not an impossibly bad throw.  Just bad.  

What I remember seeing was Burke moving hard to his left 5 feet or more to take a relatively hard hit ball about mid chest and then throwing without setting.  Had he set, I don't know what would have happened.  If he had time to set, then he should have, but my memory's not that good. The throw was bad enough that it was not an easy pick, but not utterly impossible. Berkman did a good job with it, and Ausmus did a better job keeing it in play. But there was nothing in the play that particularly showed bad range or glove work, was there?

[Jacksonian]

Quote:
I watched Burke hit in the minors at Round Rock and he got beat up inside quite often.  Lack of proper hitting mechanics were evident and is it any wonder to you that even while at AA, he had to go to Instructional League that winter for hitting instruction?  They had to breakdown his swing and rebuild it for him so he could use his hands better and make the adjustment to a major league quailty swing.

One little nit.  Burke had no business being in AA in 2002.  The Astros lack of a high-A team that year necessitated it.  In an ideal world, he'd have gone to high-A, then instucts, then AA.  Would it have made a difference?  I dunno.  But, no one would have seen the AA abused version of Burke.  Heck getting beat up in high-A may have tempered the hype and not led to us wasting time on this topic.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
you have turned into someone who would rather be pissy than anything else. you are very good at that. read Noe's post again. the play required no great range, and he got to it. he did not have enough arm to make the throw, and he threw on the run off the wrong foot because he knew he did not have enough arm. he rushed it and make a horrible throw. he also got three hits, which i'm sure makes him a good SS to you.

WFW. You asked me what I saw.  I told you.  If I'm wrong, I'm good with that.   My point's never been that he was a good shortstop, only that he was playing shortstop last night, and probably Friday and Saturday.  What's the deal with bashing the guy?

Noe says we're not bashing him because of him, but because of hype.  Seems to me we got our own hype going.

I honestly don't understand what is going on here with you and Jim, but overall, I have talked to Jim long enough to know his opinion is not based on any personal dislike for the young man.  Of that I can be real sure.

That Burke is used as an emergency shortstop does not mean that the misgivings about his ability to play the position are not real.  In fact, he continues to play the position with compensation/cheating in mind.  Heck, one of the better compensation players at that position is David Eckstein.  But Eckstein has at least mastered footwork to his benefit and thus taken some of the mystery for himself out of the equation.

Burke comes from playing the position at the college level where he could play up a little on a ball hit off the bat and have truer groundballs hit right at him.  Grass is different.  Wood bats are different.  The speed of a professional ballplayer is different.  All things that lead to exposure to Burke inability to play a true shortstop. Most of it centered on his arm.

Now he cheats.  Good for him, he's smart to use that to his advantage.  But don't try and sell me that he's a shortstop like anybody else (other than perhaps Eckstein).  Maybe Michael Young, but Young has more power to his offensive game than Burke.  Also has a stronger arm, but overall, that is the company Burke resides in.

Is that derisive to say that?  I think not.  I think it's fair to the young man.  It's unfair to the hype of greatness though.

We did get to see an example of a really bad shortstop this series, here's what the LA Times reports on Furcal

To the untrained eye, shortstop Rafael Furcal's six errors are the result of errant throws and a shaky glove.

To Dodger coach Mariano Duncan, the source of the problem is Furcal's feet.

 They aren't moving when the ball is hit. Rather than charging grounders, he is waiting flat-footed and letting the ball play him. When he does field a ball cleanly, he is so deep he has to rush the throw.
 web page

So at least the LA fans get a little education.

[NeilT]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
you have turned into someone who would rather be pissy than anything else. you are very good at that. read Noe's post again. the play required no great range, and he got to it. he did not have enough arm to make the throw, and he threw on the run off the wrong foot because he knew he did not have enough arm. he rushed it and make a horrible throw. he also got three hits, which i'm sure makes him a good SS to you.

WFW. You asked me what I saw.  I told you.  If I'm wrong, I'm good with that.   My point's never been that he was a good shortstop, only that he was playing shortstop last night, and probably Friday and Saturday.  What's the deal with bashing the guy?

Noe says we're not bashing him because of him, but because of hype.  Seems to me we got our own hype going.

I honestly don't understand what is going on here with you and Jim, but overall, I have talked to Jim long enough to know his opinion is not based on any personal dislike for the young man.  Of that I can be real sure.

That Burke is used as an emergency shortstop does not mean that the misgivings about his ability to play the position are not real.  In fact, he continues to play the position with compensation/cheating in mind.  Heck, one of the better compensation players at that position is David Eckstein.  But Eckstein has at least mastered footwork to his benefit and thus taken some of the mystery for himself out of the equation.

Burke comes from playing the position at the college level where he could play up a little on a ball hit off the bat and have truer groundballs hit right at him.  Grass is different.  Wood bats are different.  The speed of a professional ballplayer is different.  All things that lead to exposure to Burke inability to play a true shortstop. Most of it centered on his arm.

Now he cheats.  Good for him, he's smart to use that to his advantage.  But don't try and sell me that he's a shortstop like anybody else (other than perhaps Eckstein).  Maybe Michael Young, but Young has more power to his offensive game than Burke.  Also has a stronger arm, but overall, that is the company Burke resides in.

Is that derisive to say that?  I think not.  I think it's fair to the young man.  It's unfair to the hype of greatness though.

Jim asked me what I saw.  I told him.  He said I didn't see it.  I asked him what he saw.  He told me I was pissy.  WFW.  I'm pissy.  

I have not said Burke was a great shortstop, or that Burke should be a regular shortstop. I've said that Burke made a pretty good move to get to the ball, gloved it, and threw without setting his feet.  I thought that some shortstops, say Jeter, wouldn't have made it to the ball. I think your judgment of the play being rushed is probably right--it felt rushed watching it.  I thought the throw was bad, but not impossible.  It happens.  It was one play in one game.  

Is the point to reach consensus here?

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
I watched Burke hit in the minors at Round Rock and he got beat up inside quite often.  Lack of proper hitting mechanics were evident and is it any wonder to you that even while at AA, he had to go to Instructional League that winter for hitting instruction?  They had to breakdown his swing and rebuild it for him so he could use his hands better and make the adjustment to a major league quailty swing.

One little nit.  Burke had no business being in AA in 2002.  The Astros lack of a high-A team that year necessitated it.  In an ideal world, he'd have gone to high-A, then instucts, then AA.  Would it have made a difference?  I dunno.  But, no one would have seen the AA abused version of Burke.  Heck getting beat up in high-A may have tempered the hype and not led to us wasting time on this topic.

Good point.  But the following year after instructs were just as bad.  However, that was because he needed to work on his newly constructed swing.  But like I said, regardless of what occurred during that time, what was evident was the Burke coming from U of Tennessee with hype was no longer the same Burke.

Except this information never got to the media nor fans who remembered that Burke was the second coming of Bidge either.  Expectations remained the same and it was hard to read stuff about Burke as if no one ever... I mean *EVER* watched him play a single inning.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
you have turned into someone who would rather be pissy than anything else. you are very good at that. read Noe's post again. the play required no great range, and he got to it. he did not have enough arm to make the throw, and he threw on the run off the wrong foot because he knew he did not have enough arm. he rushed it and make a horrible throw. he also got three hits, which i'm sure makes him a good SS to you.

WFW. You asked me what I saw.  I told you.  If I'm wrong, I'm good with that.   My point's never been that he was a good shortstop, only that he was playing shortstop last night, and probably Friday and Saturday.  What's the deal with bashing the guy?

Noe says we're not bashing him because of him, but because of hype.  Seems to me we got our own hype going.

I honestly don't understand what is going on here with you and Jim, but overall, I have talked to Jim long enough to know his opinion is not based on any personal dislike for the young man.  Of that I can be real sure.

That Burke is used as an emergency shortstop does not mean that the misgivings about his ability to play the position are not real.  In fact, he continues to play the position with compensation/cheating in mind.  Heck, one of the better compensation players at that position is David Eckstein.  But Eckstein has at least mastered footwork to his benefit and thus taken some of the mystery for himself out of the equation.

Burke comes from playing the position at the college level where he could play up a little on a ball hit off the bat and have truer groundballs hit right at him.  Grass is different.  Wood bats are different.  The speed of a professional ballplayer is different.  All things that lead to exposure to Burke inability to play a true shortstop. Most of it centered on his arm.

Now he cheats.  Good for him, he's smart to use that to his advantage.  But don't try and sell me that he's a shortstop like anybody else (other than perhaps Eckstein).  Maybe Michael Young, but Young has more power to his offensive game than Burke.  Also has a stronger arm, but overall, that is the company Burke resides in.

Is that derisive to say that?  I think not.  I think it's fair to the young man.  It's unfair to the hype of greatness though.

We did get to see an example of a really bad shortstop this series, here's what the LA Times reports on Furcal

To the untrained eye, shortstop Rafael Furcal's six errors are the result of errant throws and a shaky glove.

To Dodger coach Mariano Duncan, the source of the problem is Furcal's feet.

 They aren't moving when the ball is hit. Rather than charging grounders, he is waiting flat-footed and letting the ball play him. When he does field a ball cleanly, he is so deep he has to rush the throw.
 web page

So at least the LA fans get a little education.

The opposite of Burke who is moving his feet when cheating.  Frucal loves his arm.  He would kiss his biceps after a throw if not for that being already been done by El Canon in LA years prior.

Flat foot, no problema... me gun him out baybee!

[mihoba]

Quote:

Hey, have I told you about Royce Huffman lately?  (And no, I'm not kidding!). How about Charlton Jimerson?  Remember Ryan Bowen from yester-year?  Yeah, I do!

Drew, Cameron

[Jacksonian]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
I watched Burke hit in the minors at Round Rock and he got beat up inside quite often.  Lack of proper hitting mechanics were evident and is it any wonder to you that even while at AA, he had to go to Instructional League that winter for hitting instruction?  They had to breakdown his swing and rebuild it for him so he could use his hands better and make the adjustment to a major league quailty swing.

One little nit.  Burke had no business being in AA in 2002.  The Astros lack of a high-A team that year necessitated it.  In an ideal world, he'd have gone to high-A, then instucts, then AA.  Would it have made a difference?  I dunno.  But, no one would have seen the AA abused version of Burke.  Heck getting beat up in high-A may have tempered the hype and not led to us wasting time on this topic.

Good point.  But the following year after instructs were just as bad.  However, that was because he needed to work on his newly constructed swing.  But like I said, regardless of what occurred during that time, what was evident was the Burke coming from U of Tennessee with hype was no longer the same Burke.

Except this information never got to the media nor fans who remembered that Burke was the second coming of Bidge either.  Expectations remained the same and it was hard to read stuff about Burke as if no one ever... I mean *EVER* watched him play a single inning.

The hype machine drives me nuts.  Let me say this now, and I'll say it again in June, this year's draft class is mediocre at the top.  Do not expect the Astros to have anyone in Bogusevic's class with their first pick this year.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:

Quote:

Hey, have I told you about Royce Huffman lately?  (And no, I'm not kidding!). How about Charlton Jimerson?  Remember Ryan Bowen from yester-year?  Yeah, I do!

Drew, Cameron

Nevin, Phil.

[pravata]

Quote:
One little nit.  Burke had no business being in AA in 2002.  The Astros lack of a high-A team that year necessitated it.  In an ideal world, he'd have gone to high-A, then instucts, then AA.  Would it have made a difference?  I dunno.  But, no one would have seen the AA abused version of Burke.  Heck getting beat up in high-A may have tempered the hype and not led to us wasting time on this topic.

Good point.  But the following year after instructs were just as bad.  However, that was because he needed to work on his newly constructed swing.  But like I said, regardless of what occurred during that time, what was evident was the Burke coming from U of Tennessee with hype was no longer the same Burke.

Except this information never got to the media nor fans who remembered that Burke was the second coming of Bidge either.  Expectations remained the same and it was hard to read stuff about Burke as if no one ever... I mean *EVER* watched him play a single inning.



Last night was the first time 99.99% of Astros fans saw him play short.

[austro]

Aaron McNeil.  Oh, the sobbing and wailing when he departed.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:

Quote:
One little nit.  Burke had no business being in AA in 2002.  The Astros lack of a high-A team that year necessitated it.  In an ideal world, he'd have gone to high-A, then instucts, then AA.  Would it have made a difference?  I dunno.  But, no one would have seen the AA abused version of Burke.  Heck getting beat up in high-A may have tempered the hype and not led to us wasting time on this topic.

Good point.  But the following year after instructs were just as bad.  However, that was because he needed to work on his newly constructed swing.  But like I said, regardless of what occurred during that time, what was evident was the Burke coming from U of Tennessee with hype was no longer the same Burke.

Except this information never got to the media nor fans who remembered that Burke was the second coming of Bidge either.  Expectations remained the same and it was hard to read stuff about Burke as if no one ever... I mean *EVER* watched him play a single inning.

Last night was the first time 99.99% of Astros fans saw him play short.



Define "Astros fans".

[jasonact]

Quote:
The hype machine drives me nuts.  Let me say this now, and I'll say it again in June, this year's draft class is mediocre at the top.  Do not expect the Astros to have anyone in Bogusevic's class with their first pick this year.

But isn't that the case every year with the June draft? For every "can't miss" draft pick that hits, there are many more "can't miss" draft picks that misses. Every June I read a where-are-they-now article about some phenom that went down in flames. We just have to understand that among the major professional drafts, the baseball June draft is probably the most difficult to predict success.

The NFL may have Ryan Leaf, but there are probably dozens of Ryan Leafs in the baseball annals.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
One little nit.  Burke had no business being in AA in 2002.  The Astros lack of a high-A team that year necessitated it.  In an ideal world, he'd have gone to high-A, then instucts, then AA.  Would it have made a difference?  I dunno.  But, no one would have seen the AA abused version of Burke.  Heck getting beat up in high-A may have tempered the hype and not led to us wasting time on this topic.

Good point.  But the following year after instructs were just as bad.  However, that was because he needed to work on his newly constructed swing.  But like I said, regardless of what occurred during that time, what was evident was the Burke coming from U of Tennessee with hype was no longer the same Burke.

Except this information never got to the media nor fans who remembered that Burke was the second coming of Bidge either.  Expectations remained the same and it was hard to read stuff about Burke as if no one ever... I mean *EVER* watched him play a single inning.

Last night was the first time 99.99% of Astros fans saw him play short.

Define "Astros fans".



Tough one.  How about, anyone who called a radio station demanding that Burke replace Everett at short last season?

[JJxvi]

 

Quote:
You make too quick assessments based on stats alone. Don't do that.

I wasn't making an assessment. Just pointing out that if Burke's double numbers are largely influenced by speed, then Biggio's certainly were. Biggio had doubles power but I *DO* remember hustle doubles. I wasnt trying to insinuate that Burke's doubles and extra base hit numbers will continue to outpace Biggio's or try to use that to determine what Burke will do in the future, just saying that so far, Burke hasn't really been a huge disappointment in the extra base hit department.

I view the stats as simply a record of what happened during Biggio's early career and Burke's young career. mihoba, I believe, told me that Burke's .383 SLG made him punch and judy. I responded by saying that Biggio didnt typically have .383 SLG numbers when he was Burke's age, and the rest of my stats were really just an exploration of what makes up the difference between the realitiy and the stats between the two players. I think it was a discussion which you have greatly aided with your opinions.

 

Quote:
You were trying to compare him to Biggio, not I.  

Correct. But it seems to be a natural thing to do given the frequency that it crops up.

 

Quote:
Hey, have I told you about Royce Huffman lately? (And no, I'm not kidding!). How about Charlton Jimerson? Remember Ryan Bowen from yester-year? Yeah, I do!
 

To the innumerable mass of sheeple...every player they havent seen play is the next great <fill in the blank>

The backup quaterback is the guy who will lead us to the Super Bowl, the white guy on the end of the bench should be in the game cause he's such a spark plug and last game he hit a couple three pointers in garbage time, etc etc etc.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
One little nit.  Burke had no business being in AA in 2002.  The Astros lack of a high-A team that year necessitated it.  In an ideal world, he'd have gone to high-A, then instucts, then AA.  Would it have made a difference?  I dunno.  But, no one would have seen the AA abused version of Burke.  Heck getting beat up in high-A may have tempered the hype and not led to us wasting time on this topic.

Good point.  But the following year after instructs were just as bad.  However, that was because he needed to work on his newly constructed swing.  But like I said, regardless of what occurred during that time, what was evident was the Burke coming from U of Tennessee with hype was no longer the same Burke.

Except this information never got to the media nor fans who remembered that Burke was the second coming of Bidge either.  Expectations remained the same and it was hard to read stuff about Burke as if no one ever... I mean *EVER* watched him play a single inning.

Last night was the first time 99.99% of Astros fans saw him play short.

Define "Astros fans".

Tough one.  How about, anyone who called a radio station demanding that Burke replace Everett at short last season?



Then are you sure you want to admit that you know enough about that set to know that 99.99% of them watched the 1 play Burke had last night?

I'm a different kind of Astros fan, and I missed it.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:

Quote:
The hype machine drives me nuts.  Let me say this now, and I'll say it again in June, this year's draft class is mediocre at the top.  Do not expect the Astros to have anyone in Bogusevic's class with their first pick this year.

But isn't that the case every year with the June draft? For every "can't miss" draft pick that hits, there are many more "can't miss" draft picks that misses. Every June I read a where-are-they-now article about some phenom that went down in flames. We just have to understand that among the major professional drafts, the baseball June draft is probably the most difficult to predict success.

The NFL may have Ryan Leaf, but there are probably dozens of Ryan Leafs in the baseball annals.

Yes every year there are more "can't miss's" that miss than those that do.  But, the number of "can't miss's" varies from year to year and unfortunately people look at where a guy is picked rather than at the player hence the issue with Burke.  In 2001 there were very few "can't miss" guys and those were gone by the #8 pick.  But, that didn't stop folks from overblowing Burke.

Last year's class had talent in the supplemental 1st round that was better than what Burke brought to the table in June of '01.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:
 

Quote:
You were trying to compare him to Biggio, not I.  

Correct. But it seems to be a natural thing to do given the frequency that it crops up.

Then it's your job to resist and not do it.  Burke ain't Biggio.  End the hype now!  End the hype now!

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
The hype machine drives me nuts.  Let me say this now, and I'll say it again in June, this year's draft class is mediocre at the top.  Do not expect the Astros to have anyone in Bogusevic's class with their first pick this year.

But isn't that the case every year with the June draft? For every "can't miss" draft pick that hits, there are many more "can't miss" draft picks that misses. Every June I read a where-are-they-now article about some phenom that went down in flames. We just have to understand that among the major professional drafts, the baseball June draft is probably the most difficult to predict success.

The NFL may have Ryan Leaf, but there are probably dozens of Ryan Leafs in the baseball annals.

Yes every year there are more "can't miss's" that miss than those that do.  But, the number of "can't miss's" varies from year to year and unfortunately people look at where a guy is picked rather than at the player hence the issue with Burke.  In 2001 there were very few "can't miss" guys and those were gone by the #8 pick.  But, that didn't stop folks from overblowing Burke.

Last year's class had talent in the supplemental 1st round that was better than what Burke brought to the table in June of '01.

Additionally, rarely is a #1 pick in the mlb draft looked upon like an NBA or NFL #1 pick.  It is more "can't miss" in those sports than in the mlb.  Having said that, the cross-over from sport to sport has created a sort of melding of sports entertainment viewing and also opinion from fans.  Notice someone using "Franchise player" the other day to dictate what a prized free agent player would look like.

Any way, players in the mlb are drafted so they can be developed.  That is why most of the MLBPA members abhor drafted players coming in with agents asking for millions of dollars.  (See: Drew, J.D.)  The attitude from these players of the MLBPA is that it takes lots of time, hard work and development to become even what would be called an average major league player.

But agents are smart, so are players that are undrafted.  They know that public opinion is on their side in most cases.  Fans do not know (nowadays) how to properly set their expectations when they hear "#1 draft pick".  Organizations scare me when they tend to react to those pronouncements of "bust" on such high mlb draft picks too.

Good for Brandon Phillips this season, the one time ubber prospect-turned bust-and now tearing up the mlb for the Cincy Reds one.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
One little nit.  Burke had no business being in AA in 2002.  The Astros lack of a high-A team that year necessitated it.  In an ideal world, he'd have gone to high-A, then instucts, then AA.  Would it have made a difference?  I dunno.  But, no one would have seen the AA abused version of Burke.  Heck getting beat up in high-A may have tempered the hype and not led to us wasting time on this topic.

Good point.  But the following year after instructs were just as bad.  However, that was because he needed to work on his newly constructed swing.  But like I said, regardless of what occurred during that time, what was evident was the Burke coming from U of Tennessee with hype was no longer the same Burke.

Except this information never got to the media nor fans who remembered that Burke was the second coming of Bidge either.  Expectations remained the same and it was hard to read stuff about Burke as if no one ever... I mean *EVER* watched him play a single inning.

Last night was the first time 99.99% of Astros fans saw him play short.

Define "Astros fans".

Tough one.  How about, anyone who called a radio station demanding that Burke replace Everett at short last season?

Then are you sure you want to admit that you know enough about that set to know that 99.99% of them watched the 1 play Burke had last night?

I'm a different kind of Astros fan, and I missed it.



Well that's a flaw in my theory.  Even if you had been watching the game you might have missed The Play.

[astro pete]

Quote:

The hype machine drives me nuts.  Let me say this now, and I'll say it again in June, this year's draft class is mediocre at the top.  Do not expect the Astros to have anyone in Bogusevic's class with their first pick this year.

Maybe this should be moved to Minor Opinions, but since you brought up Bogusevic I was hoping to solicit your opinion about him.  I got to watch him pitch a lot last year at Tulane, and quite frankly, I was pretty surprised he went as high in the draft as he did.  He could dominate the Southwest Missouri States of the world, but he was hit hard by upper tier teams (Texas hit him well in Omaha, Rice hit him harder during the SRs, and Fullerton embarassed him during the regular season).  To be honest, he wasn't even Tulane's best pitcher last year (Micah Owings was).  

All that said, I see he made your Top 10 list this year.  Is my pessimism unfounded?

[Jacksonian]

Quote:

Quote:

The hype machine drives me nuts.  Let me say this now, and I'll say it again in June, this year's draft class is mediocre at the top.  Do not expect the Astros to have anyone in Bogusevic's class with their first pick this year.

Maybe this should be moved to Minor Opinions, but since you brought up Bogusevic I was hoping to solicit your opinion about him.  I got to watch him pitch a lot last year at Tulane, and quite frankly, I was pretty surprised he went as high in the draft as he did.  He could dominate the Southwest Missouri States of the world, but he was hit hard by upper tier teams (Texas hit him well in Omaha, Rice hit him harder during the SRs, and Fullerton embarassed him during the regular season).  To be honest, he wasn't even Tulane's best pitcher last year (Micah Owings was).  

All that said, I see he made your Top 10 list this year.  Is my pessimism unfounded?

Yep.  Remember, he spent his career as a 2-way player (NTTAWWT).  So, he didn't get to spend the days he didn't pitch working on pitching.  Instead he spent them getting ready to hit and play the outfield.  He's a lefty who throws low to mid-90's with fair off-speed stuff.  Most scouts I heard preferred him long-term as a pitcher rather than as an outfielder.  He is now finally able to focus solely on pitching.  The expectation is that he has the physical tools, intelligence, willingness to work, and mental toughness to work on and improve the quality of his pitches, improve his command, and learn how to be a pitcher.

[DVauthrin]

If you think Chris Burke can play a major league shortstop after watching the play he received an error on, I have some land I want to sell you.

That was a routine play for any decent shortstop.   And he didn't have the arm strength to get it to 1st.   He was just lucky he didn't have to throw off his back foot in the hole or it would have been ugly.    I had a perfect view of the play from my field box seat on the 3rd base line, and it was a play every big league shortstop should make with ease.

Also, Neil, what does 2d mean: 1. Burke probably will be an everyday player, for the Astros, at 2d. Next year.

[astro pete]

Quote:

Yep.  Remember, he spent his career as a 2-way player (NTTAWWT).  So, he didn't get to spend the days he didn't pitch working on pitching.  Instead he spent them getting ready to hit and play the outfield.  He's a lefty who throws low to mid-90's with fair off-speed stuff.  Most scouts I heard preferred him long-term as a pitcher rather than as an outfielder.  He is now finally able to focus solely on pitching.  The expectation is that he has the physical tools, intelligence, willingness to work, and mental toughness to work on and improve the quality of his pitches, improve his command, and learn how to be a pitcher.

Thanks.  So, if you were to compare him to Micah Owings (who was also a two-way player, and who appears to be on a faster track to the big leagues), is the main difference between the two the greater potential upside of Bogusevic?

[chuck]

Quote:
Where do you sit?

Right here, like most of you, reading virtually every post every day since 1999 or so.

Quote:
Obviously, if personal vitrol for a player were the issue of the day around here, we'd start an online petition to have Uncle Drayton get rid of the player.  I don't think anyone here has every started or even condoned a fan-based, grass roots effort to make decisions on players, managers and even owners for the Houston Astros or anyone in the mlb.

Have you?

If you maintain that most Burke-related negativity is reflective of the hype, fine. I have no agenda that would direct me to believe otherwise and will happily take you at your word as I implied earlier.

I'm intrigued though as to why you try to turn the tables a bit and suggest that constant criticism of underperforming or just unlikeable players is the exclusive domain of halfwits who start petitions or take out ads in a paper's sports section. I also don't really understand what that has to do with my apparent misappraisal of the Burke-specific negativity occasionally prevalent here.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:

Quote:

Yep.  Remember, he spent his career as a 2-way player (NTTAWWT).  So, he didn't get to spend the days he didn't pitch working on pitching.  Instead he spent them getting ready to hit and play the outfield.  He's a lefty who throws low to mid-90's with fair off-speed stuff.  Most scouts I heard preferred him long-term as a pitcher rather than as an outfielder.  He is now finally able to focus solely on pitching.  The expectation is that he has the physical tools, intelligence, willingness to work, and mental toughness to work on and improve the quality of his pitches, improve his command, and learn how to be a pitcher.

Thanks.  So, if you were to compare him to Micah Owings (who was also a two-way player, and who appears to be on a faster track to the big leagues), is the main difference between the two the greater potential upside of Bogusevic?

Basically, yes.  To highlight that, Bogusevic went in the first round and Owings in the third.  BA had Bogusevic as their 19th ranked prospect last year and Owings at 142; both as pitchers.  But, all that is out the window now.  Now, they've got to develop and perform.

[astro pete]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Yep.  Remember, he spent his career as a 2-way player (NTTAWWT).  So, he didn't get to spend the days he didn't pitch working on pitching.  Instead he spent them getting ready to hit and play the outfield.  He's a lefty who throws low to mid-90's with fair off-speed stuff.  Most scouts I heard preferred him long-term as a pitcher rather than as an outfielder.  He is now finally able to focus solely on pitching.  The expectation is that he has the physical tools, intelligence, willingness to work, and mental toughness to work on and improve the quality of his pitches, improve his command, and learn how to be a pitcher.

Thanks.  So, if you were to compare him to Micah Owings (who was also a two-way player, and who appears to be on a faster track to the big leagues), is the main difference between the two the greater potential upside of Bogusevic?

Basically, yes.  To highlight that, Bogusevic went in the first round and Owings in the third.  BA had Bogusevic as their 19th ranked prospect last year and Owings at 142; both as pitchers.  But, all that is out the window now.  Now, they've got to develop and perform.

Cool.  Thanks.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Right here, like most of you, reading virtually every post every day since 1999 or so.

Yet, we apparently *stand* at different viewpoints.  Cool!

Quote:
If you maintain that most Burke-related negativity is reflective of the hype, fine.

Most *OWA* criticism of Burke... and to call it negativity is quite dissengenous.  It's negative to say that you've watched a young man perform at a position and find that he lacks the skills necessary to play there permanently?  If so, then most of the world is negative in the grand scope of things.  Burke is a fine player, but when people rush in with the Messiah label for Burke, it is very lost to me.  To say that he is not the Messaih is not negative at all, it is actually very positive.

Emperor without clothes sort of thing.

Quote:
I have no agenda that would direct me to believe otherwise and will happily take you at your word as I implied earlier.

Sure.

Quote:
I'm intrigued though as to why you try to turn the tables a bit and suggest that constant criticism of underperforming or just unlikeable players is the exclusive domain of halfwits who start petitions or take out ads in a paper's sports section.

Because I can tell the difference.  Can't you?

Quote:
I also don't really understand what that has to do with my apparent misappraisal of the Burke-specific negativity occasionally prevalent here.

Because I can tell the difference between unabashed halfwitted opinions that lead to actually starting a petition to, say... get rid of Dan Miceli... and saying Burke lacks the skills to be the Messaih everyone proclaims him to be.

Is it *really* that hard?

[Lefty]

Quote:
Also, Neil, what does 2d mean: 1. Burke probably will be an everyday player, for the Astros, at 2d. Next year.

I ain't him, but I'm going way out on a really small limb & guessing he meant second base.

[NeilT]

Quote:
If you think Chris Burke can play a major league shortstop after watching the play he received an error on, I have some land I want to sell you.

That was a routine play for any decent shortstop.   And he didn't have the arm strength to get it to 1st.   He was just lucky he didn't have to throw off his back foot in the hole or it would have been ugly.    I had a perfect view of the play from my field box seat on the 3rd base line, and it was a play every big league shortstop should make with ease.

Also, Neil, what does 2d mean: 1. Burke probably will be an everyday player, for the Astros, at 2d. Next year.

It's a law school thing.  Lawyers have certain things drilled into their head.  You spell judgement judgment.  You write 2nd 2d, 3rd 3d, 4th, well, 4th.

[DVauthrin]

Barring an injury to Biggio, Burke won't be the everyday 2B in 2007.    Biggio needs another year after this one to get 3,000 hits, and he shows little sign of slowing down.   He will be starting there next year if he is healthy.

[NeilT]

Probably right.

[JJxvi]

Besides. Everyone knows Astros players dont break into everyday status until they are roughly 33 years old.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Besides. Everyone knows Astros players dont break into everyday status until they are roughly 33 years old.

And that, of course, is too old to be called "franchise".  Given that Burke's OWA nickname last year was indeed "franchise", it's sad to see this happen to the young man.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Quote:

Quote:
Besides. Everyone knows Astros players dont break into everyday status until they are roughly 33 years old.

And that, of course, is too old to be called "franchise".  Given that Burke's OWA nickname last year was indeed "franchise", it's sad to see this happen to the young man.

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Biggio essentially push out 2 long time Astros first at catcher (Ashby or was he already gone w/ Baily instead) and Doran at 2B?  Either way, them's the breaks, no?

Or did I miss the point entirely and miss the point and what's actually sad to see is the "franchise" label, and the accompanying hype, heaped upon a young player?

[chuck]

Quote:
Most *OWA* criticism of Burke... and to call it negativity is quite dissengenous.  It's negative to say that you've watched a young man perform at a position and find that he lacks the skills necessary to play there permanently?  If so, then most of the world is negative in the grand scope of things.  Burke is a fine player, but when people rush in with the Messiah label for Burke, it is very lost to me.  To say that he is not the Messaih is not negative at all, it is actually very positive.

OK, I see where you're coming from now. I was not initially addressing criticism of his defense. When he was coming out the minors you guys in Austin who had seen him far more than the rest of us had warned us that his arm was weak, that he was not a SS, and that his footwork was poor enough to where it might be a stretch to see him as an everyday big league second baseman. And then there was the news about Hun's being pissed at the scouts selling him a bill of goods regarding Burke at SS. So everyone around here was pretty much on the same page regarding Burke's defensive liabilities and what if anything he might be able to do for the team on a regular basis defensively post-Biggio.

The comments of Neil and others reminded me that Burke was constantly referred to around here last year as punch and judy, and in the various contexts where I was seeing that it seemed to me to be used mostly in a pejorative dimension. This is what I didn't understand. If he's slotted eventually to play second base and is a singles hitter, what's the big deal? I mean, if plenty of people were demanding that Burke play left on a full time basis the punch and judy criticism would be timely and valid. But around here at least no one was doing that as far as I recall. God knows what goes on elsewhere or on talk radio or on the Chronicle's 'blogs.'

[JJxvi]

Casey Candaele played 2nd before Biggio. Mark Bailey was traded for Candaele before Biggio came up. Alex Trevino and Ashby split time the year Biggio was brought up.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
Besides. Everyone knows Astros players dont break into everyday status until they are roughly 33 years old.

And that, of course, is too old to be called "franchise".  Given that Burke's OWA nickname last year was indeed "franchise", it's sad to see this happen to the young man.

Unless you're Lance Berkman, or Morgan Ensberg, or Adam Everett, or Roy Oswalt.  But Burke got pegged because Richard Justice said and wrote that Chris Burke should be playing instead of Jeff Kent midway through 2004.  Then other writers saw that, and thought Burke instead of a future HOF?  He must be great, he's our pick for RoY 2005.  Meanwhile, fans who read Justice and these other writers are calling in saying Burke should play short, or left, or second because he's great.  Other people, listening to the radio, not realizing how this got started because they don't keep a wary eye on Richard Justice, say hey, I've heard of this Chris Burke, why isn't he playing short?  Then the first time they see him play short they realize he doesn't know which foot to plant, or whether he should even plant a foot, before he throws.   Never mind just count the doubles.

[JimR]

hell, Baseball Prospectus, which i think is one hilarious book, called him a favorite for RoY with Biggio getting ready to move back to 2B!

Burke can hit just fine, it appears, to be a middle infielder, but he will never, ever even be average at SS. he is very valuable as a utility player.

he had a bad case of arrogance in RR, but i imagine the Astros vets have taken care of that. and to be perfectly clear, i do not want ANYONE on the Astros to fail, and i would be glad to be wrong about Burke.

[JJxvi]

Just count the doubles.

[MRaup]

Quote:
Just count the doubles.

I counted them... What now?

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
Just count the doubles.

I counted them... What now?

Move to the front of the line.

[Surferwang]

I know everyone here seems sold on the fact that Burke can't play SS, but this was his first game playing the position in 3 (?) years.  That wasn't a hard play, but it's definitely a play that takes some time to get down.  

I think it's funny how many of you think that Burke won't make adjustments to become an adequate defensive SS. If he gets his footwork down he can make that play.  Yeah, his arm sucks, but look at Eckstein's noodle.  Foot work is something that anybody can improve, and that's all it will take with Burke's mediocre arm.  He won't be good enough defensively to be an everyday SS, but filling in every once in awhile won't kill the team.  Writing him off so early is just some more unnecessary bashing of Burke that goes on here.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
Most *OWA* criticism of Burke... and to call it negativity is quite dissengenous.  It's negative to say that you've watched a young man perform at a position and find that he lacks the skills necessary to play there permanently?  If so, then most of the world is negative in the grand scope of things.  Burke is a fine player, but when people rush in with the Messiah label for Burke, it is very lost to me.  To say that he is not the Messaih is not negative at all, it is actually very positive.

OK, I see where you're coming from now. I was not initially addressing criticism of his defense. When he was coming out the minors you guys in Austin who had seen him far more than the rest of us had warned us that his arm was weak, that he was not a SS, and that his footwork was poor enough to where it might be a stretch to see him as an everyday big league second baseman. And then there was the news about Hun's being pissed at the scouts selling him a bill of goods regarding Burke at SS. So everyone around here was pretty much on the same page regarding Burke's defensive liabilities and what if anything he might be able to do for the team on a regular basis defensively post-Biggio.

The comments of Neil and others reminded me that Burke was constantly referred to around here last year as punch and judy, and in the various contexts where I was seeing that it seemed to me to be used mostly in a pejorative dimension. This is what I didn't understand. If he's slotted eventually to play second base and is a singles hitter, what's the big deal? I mean, if plenty of people were demanding that Burke play left on a full time basis the punch and judy criticism would be timely and valid. But around here at least no one was doing that as far as I recall. God knows what goes on elsewhere or on talk radio or on the Chronicle's 'blogs.'

Cool.  For whatever it's worth, I think the time Burke has put in to correct the flaws in his swing (believe me, he was terrible prior to IL) have elevated him above "Punch and Judy".  That label was much more appropriate in AA.  However, I don't think Burke has worked his way into power hitting middle infielder as was once believed when he was drafted.

His adjustment changed enough of his swing to take care of that.  He's a nice hitter, probably develop a little further, but he's not going to remind anyone of the second coming of Rogers Hornsby either.  And that is fair to say of the kid... and like I've said, I'm glad to be wrong about his career.

I was wrong about Biggio three years ago when I openly stated in this forum that he should retire because his bat speed was gone.  Deadly seriously obviously what the hell do I know wrong.  I suck... a lot... that way.

[pravata]

He played short in ST.

[toddthebod]

Jim.  Baseball Prospectus wasn't the only magazine that labeled Burke as a potential rookie of the year.

And the newspapers weren't the only ones who compared Burke to Biggio.  Here is what Michael N. said about Burke in his 12/4/2001 Minor Opinions.

"The comparisons to Biggio are made constantly because they are obvious. Burke hits for average and a little pop, gets on base, busts his ass, hustles on every play and dirt clings to his jersey such that he is the obvious successor to Pigpen. Player development folks with Houston have hinted at his being on the fast-track so probability says he will begin the season with AA Round Rock. Which position he plays, shortstop or second base, is undetermined. But it will surely be a lot of fun for the RR faithful to have their first real burner stealing bags at the Dell next season."

The Link

So Burke may be a "victim" of the hype, but the collective "we" also contributed to the hype.  It wasn't just Richard Justice.  I know that I liked the idea of someone just like Biggio stepping into Biggio's shoes.

So now it's 2006 and we know that Burke isn't Biggio.  So what.  Biggio is a future hall of famer and there aren't a whole lot of plaques in Cooperstown.  And so what that Burke isn't real shortstop.  Neither was Vizcaino.  But it is helpful that he can step into that role in emergency situations.

I would guess that Biggio is still the starting second baseman for the Astros next season.  And the Astros will use Burke as they are doing right now.  Occasional starts at second, short, and left-field.  And then Burke steps into the starting role in 2008. I'm cool with that.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I know everyone here seems sold on the fact that Burke can't play SS, but this was his first game playing the position in 3 (?) years.  That wasn't a hard play, but it's definitely a play that takes some time to get down.  

I think it's funny how many of you think that Burke won't make adjustments to become an adequate defensive SS. If he gets his footwork down he can make that play.  Yeah, his arm sucks, but look at Eckstein's noodle.  Foot work is something that anybody can improve, and that's all it will take with Burke's mediocre arm.  He won't be good enough defensively to be an everyday SS, but filling in every once in awhile won't kill the team.  Writing him off so early is just some more unnecessary bashing of Burke that goes on here.

*sigh*, what you wrote was said... by me!  And this increasing insistence that we're bashing the kid is just wrong.  We're setting the proper expectations (just like you just did) so the Messiah crappola would just not rear it's ugly head in here.  (See pravata's last post about Pinwheel and the masses).

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Jim.  Baseball Prospectus wasn't the only magazine that labeled Burke as a potential rookie of the year.

And the newspapers weren't the only ones who compared Burke to Biggio.  Here is what Michael N. said about Burke in his 12/4/2001 Minor Opinions.

"The comparisons to Biggio are made constantly because they are obvious. Burke hits for average and a little pop, gets on base, busts his ass, hustles on every play and dirt clings to his jersey such that he is the obvious successor to Pigpen. Player development folks with Houston have hinted at his being on the fast-track so probability says he will begin the season with AA Round Rock. Which position he plays, shortstop or second base, is undetermined. But it will surely be a lot of fun for the RR faithful to have their first real burner stealing bags at the Dell next season."

The Link

In-freaking-credible how some people can't make distinctions!  Nash did his work *based* on scouting reports.  After Burke played a few seasons in the minors, especially his work in AA, Nash was right there (I know, I sat with him aplenty watching... along with Jim and Mark and others) with everyone else who said Burke needed to re-work his swing.  How can entirely miss the point about the *hype* now as opposed to *before* he stepped into the field of play as a professional?

Quote:
So Burke may be a "victim" of the hype, but the collective "we" also contributed to the hype.  It wasn't just Richard Justice.  I know that I liked the idea of someone just like Biggio stepping into Biggio's shoes.

Pinwheel had a wonderful chance to read scouting reports, talk to the scouts themselves and even talk to organizational men *after* Burke's first few years in the pros.  He didn't, instead he went "hype" and incurred the wrath of Kent because of it.

THAT is very different than Nash's report prior to Burke stepping on the field of play.  Nash was going by the information given by scouts at the time... some of which incurred the wrath of Hunsicker because of it.

Quote:
So now it's 2006 and we know that Burke isn't Biggio.  So what.  Biggio is a future hall of famer and there aren't a whole lot of plaques in Cooperstown.  And so what that Burke isn't real shortstop.  Neither was Vizcaino.  But it is helpful that he can step into that role in emergency situations.

Good Lord!  What do you think folks have been saying around here if not just this?

Quote:
I would guess that Biggio is still the starting second baseman for the Astros next season.  And the Astros will use Burke as they are doing right now.  Occasional starts at second, short, and left-field.  And then Burke steps into the starting role in 2008. I'm cool with that.

Be cool with him being traded too, because it has as much a chance of happening next off-season as his starting for the Astros in '08.  And that is not a slam on Burke, so don't take it that way.

[toddthebod]

Nash's report was made after Burke's first season at Michigan.  So it was not before he stepped onto the field as a professional as you state.

All I am saying is that we contributed to the Biggio comparisons.  We may have disclaimed them (as Michael did after the first season at RR and as Jim did almost immediately after seeing him play), but we were right there at the beginning and our nipples were pretty hard.  Is Justice an idiot?  Sure.  Should Justice have seen Burke play before saying that he should replace Kent?  Of course.  I'm not trying to compare anyone's comments in late 2001 to Justice's comments in 2005.  

As for the discussion between you and Chuck about whether people here were Burke-bashing or just trying to fight the hype, I will say that to the casual reader, some of the comments about Burke seemed unncessarily mean-spirited.  But we all know that that was just Jim being Jim.

Finally, if Burke is traded that's cool too.  I hope that we get something good in return.  But I would personally like to see a little more before we trade him.

[Zan]

Quote:
Burke can hit just fine, it appears, to be a middle infielder, but he will never, ever even be average at SS. he is very valuable as a utility player.

I know it's been stated before, but why, exactly, can't Burke be an average SS? I'd think he can adjust the footwork, and his arm isn't any worse than Eckstein's, is it? Obviously, AE's the better choice at SS, but I'm not sure why it's a foregone conclusion that Burke can't ever be adequate there. That's an honest question - I don't doubt you, I'm just wondering why people seem certain he can't make the necessary adjustments for SS.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Nash's report was made after Burke's first season at Michigan.  So it was not before he stepped onto the field as a professional as you state.

Burke reported to Michigan right from U of Tennessee and did well at low A ball.  It was a whole 8 weeks of play as I remember.  And no, Nash went by what scouts were telling him prior to seeing him play an entire season.

Quote:
All I am saying is that we contributed to the Biggio comparisons.

Todd, you surprise me how intelligent you are in your own profession but fail to grasp subtlety of what is being said.  Do you *NOT* understand that Pinwheel was hyping Burke in 2004?  2-0-0-4!  And now we have a whole slew of radio call-in fans and others who follow that hype.  It is a huge difference what Nash wrote and what Pinwheel wrote.  It is the latter that perplexes me, because once you got to watch Burke, you knew the flaws were there.  Not Nash, not nobody was still hyping the kid that I know of.  No one by Pinwheel and now a whole bunch of media and fans wanting to sit Preston Wilson (permanently) and/or Adam Everett because, you know... you *HAVE* to find a spot for Burke!

Why?

Quote:
We may have disclaimed them (as Michael did after the first season at RR and as Jim did almost immediately after seeing him play), but we were right there at the beginning and our nipples were pretty hard.  Is Justice an idiot?  Sure.  Should Justice have seen Burke play before saying that he should replace Kent?  Of course.  I'm not trying to compare anyone's comments in late 2001 to Justice's comments in 2005.

Ahum... you did.  Jim was talking about BP's pronouncement prior to THIS season.  

Quote:
As for the discussion between you and Chuck about whether people here were Burke-bashing or just trying to fight the hype, I will say that to the casual reader, some of the comments about Burke seemed unncessarily mean-spirited.  But we all know that that was just Jim being Jim.

I fail to see when Jim has said anything against Burke as much as I see him bash the people who prance in here with pronouncements of glory for Burke.  Do you understand the huge difference?

Quote:
Finally, if Burke is traded that's cool too.  I hope that we get something good in return.  But I would personally like to see a little more before we trade him.

Well, you maybe... but I won't trade him because... well... I can't.  Purpura might.  And again, if the man has no position for the next two years, he might be better served being moved so he can play every day for someone.  Sure they can keep him around and he can be a starter when he nears 30... happened to Morgan Ensberg.  But right now, Biggio is going for 3000 hits.  Two years, three... four?  I don't know.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I know it's been stated before, but why, exactly, can't Burke be an average SS?

All that is being said *right now* is that he's below average.  So below average that they moved him from shortstop to second base.  Why?  Because he can't make it to average?  I don't know enough to say that this is true, but watching him butcher plays at short in the minors made for some hand covering eyes moments.

Quote:
I'd think he can adjust the footwork, and his arm isn't any worse than Eckstein's, is it?

First of all, his footwork is even a problem at second base.  Shortstop is much more demanding.  Let's let him start at second base with mastering footwork and work his way up from there.  Eckstein has never been moved *away* from short from my recollection (I could be wrong), but Burke has to spend a ton of time there to get to the place where Eckstein is right now.  And as far as Eckstein is concerned, he cheats as a shortstop, which is very smart given his limitations.  Burke has to learn how to cheat a lot better than he's been doing... and that takes a lot of work too.  So how much time in the minors do you think he should spend working on all this?  Two, maybe three years.  In that time, he might be passed up by another shortstop or two.  Do you think Burke will do that?

Quote:
Obviously, AE's the better choice at SS, but I'm not sure why it's a foregone conclusion that Burke can't ever be adequate there. That's an honest question - I don't doubt you, I'm just wondering why people seem certain he can't make the necessary adjustments for SS.

Because he hasn't been there for three years now.  There is no magic fairy dust to make him an average major league shortstop that plays everyday.  It's called work and he would have to put the work in to do it.  Want a good comparison?  How about Biggio being moved to center to make room for Kent and having all of one spring training to learn the position.  And then moving to left to learn that position after Beltran joined the team.  Guess what, Biggio was awful at both positions.

You cannot afford to have awful playing at shortstop.  Not perhpas the most important fielding position of all the positions.  No any more than saying you want Biggio to go back to being a catcher.

[Zan]

Quote:
But I would personally like to see a little more before we trade him.

Quote:

Well, you maybe... but I won't trade him because... well... I can't.  

The anti-"we" retorts are overdone. It's a figure of speech, and one that I'm sure the Astros PR department is glad to hear the fans use.

We are in this together - we pay the money, and they play for our entertainment.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
But I would personally like to see a little more before we trade him.

Quote:

Well, you maybe... but I won't trade him because... well... I can't.  

The anti-"we" retorts are overdone. It's a figure of speech, and one that I'm sure the Astros PR department is glad to hear the fans use.

We are in this together - we pay the money, and they play for our entertainment.

No, TTB *really* would trade him.  He has powers you know.  (damn, I can't have fun with a friend and longtime poster any more?  Damn!)   <------ I'm going to have to go to the smileys from now on!

[toddthebod]

Quote:
Todd, you surprise me how intelligent you are in your own profession but fail to grasp subtlety of what is being said.  Do you *NOT* understand that Pinwheel was hyping Burke in 2004?  2-0-0-4!.

This is exactly what I was said (although I said 2005 and not 2004 -- mea culpa, brain fart).  I'm not comparing Nash (or you) to Justice.  I'm just saying that at one time we also thought that Burke might be the next Biggio.  And Burke had more than 200 ABs at Michigan.  Not a terribly small sample size although it was at a low level.  

Quote:
Ahum... you did.  Jim was talking about BP's pronouncement prior to THIS season.

 

BP didn't say this prior to this season.  Nor did anyone else.  It was prior to the 2005 season.  Chris had 318 ABs last season.  He's not eligible for rookie of the year.  

Quote:
Well, you maybe... but I won't trade him because... well... I can't.  Purpura might.  And again, if the man has no position for the next two years, he might be better served being moved so he can play every day for someone.  Sure they can keep him around and he can be a starter when he nears 30... happened to Morgan Ensberg.  But right now, Biggio is going for 3000 hits.  Two years, three... four?  I don't know.

Unless Biggio has a dramatic dropoff or gets injured, he'll get to 3000 hits next season -- knock on wood (and I just sacraficed a chicken to Scott Baio).  That's why I pencil Burke into the lineup for the 2008 season.  He just turned 26.  He'll be 28 in 08.  Is 28 too old to become a starter?  Not necessarily.  Particularly if we can get him some at bats and occasional starts now.  Unless we have some minor league stud who can go into the lineup in 2008, why not keep Burke?  It's not like we're paying him a lot of money.

As for the talk show callers and the clarks, fuck em.  But I do understand the frustration with Wilson so far this season.  I know that he's a streaky player.  But it would be nice to see a prolonged hot streak sometime in April/May.

[toddthebod]

You know I'd trade anyone in the right deal.  If the Mets were willing to trade Aaron Heilman to the Astros, Burke would be history.  What a sweet rotation for the future.  

Oswalt
Rodriguez
Buchholtz
Heilman  
Hirsh

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
But I would personally like to see a little more before we trade him.

Quote:

Well, you maybe... but I won't trade him because... well... I can't.  

The anti-"we" retorts are overdone. It's a figure of speech, and one that I'm sure the Astros PR department is glad to hear the fans use.

We are in this together - we pay the money, and they play for our entertainment.

egggg... cellent.  We pay.  When you go to a movie do you yell at the screen?  Do you write to the producer how you felt the lighting when Sam was carrying Frodo up the mountain should have had more shadows?  Do you write books and articles about how you could have found more motivation for Zach Braff's character in the fireplace scene in Garden State? No, you don't.  Yeah it's a figure of speech, it's also a delusion.  They are playing, we are watching.  We are seperate from them.  Understand it or don't.  Doesnt make it "overdone".

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
Burke can hit just fine, it appears, to be a middle infielder, but he will never, ever even be average at SS. he is very valuable as a utility player.

I know it's been stated before, but why, exactly, can't Burke be an average SS? I'd think he can adjust the footwork, and his arm isn't any worse than Eckstein's, is it? Obviously, AE's the better choice at SS, but I'm not sure why it's a foregone conclusion that Burke can't ever be adequate there. That's an honest question - I don't doubt you, I'm just wondering why people seem certain he can't make the necessary adjustments for SS.

I havent seen Burke play short enough, but I have seen Eckstein.  He is a wily motherfucker.  Comes in on every ball, doesn't get caught on his back foot, the crow hops.  Burke has been living on ability and reflexes.  It would take him years to figure out that stuff.  If the Astros were the Rays or the Marlins or even the Nationals and they had 2 years to waste, maybe.  Maybe they'd have a doubles hitter who was a fair shortstop.  Who could make the plays an average shortstop made, maybe.  But, I doubt it. I still need to see him go to his right.  But why?  What's he going to do at short for a team that could contend for another pennant that Everett isn't doing?  Another thing, and this isn't in your post but I'm mentioning it here anyway, Burke, whenever he is in the OD lineup, is not replacing Biggio.  Biggio is Biggio and Burke is Burke.  Stop saying the 2 names in the same sentence.

[Zan]

Quote:


I havent seen Burke play short enough, but I have seen Eckstein.  He is a wily motherfucker.  Comes in on every ball, doesn't get caught on his back foot, the crow hops.  Burke has been living on ability and reflexes.  It would take him years to figure out that stuff.  If the Astros were the Rays or the Marlins or even the Nationals and they had 2 years to waste, maybe.  Maybe they'd have a doubles hitter who was a fair shortstop.  Who could make the plays an average shortstop made, maybe.  But, I doubt it. I still need to see him go to his right.  But why?  What's he going to do at short for a team that could contend for another pennant that Everett isn't doing?  Another thing, and this isn't in your post but I'm mentioning it here anyway, Burke, whenever he is in the OD lineup, is not replacing Biggio.  Biggio is Biggio and Burke is Burke.  Stop saying the 2 names in the same sentence.

I agree with all that. That's well-stated, thanks.

[shortstop]

I cant believe I read 7 pages of this. I need to get a life!

[JJxvi]

 

Quote:
egggg... cellent. We pay. When you go to a movie do you yell at the screen? Do you write to the producer how you felt the lighting when Sam was carrying Frodo up the mountain should have had more shadows? Do you write books and articles about how you could have found more motivation for Zach Braff's character in the fireplace scene in Garden State? No, you don't. Yeah it's a figure of speech, it's also a delusion. They are playing, we are watching. We are seperate from them. Understand it or don't. Doesnt make it "overdone".  

Why do they have "Houston" emblazoned across their chests when they play on the orad then?

[Zan]

Quote:
Yeah it's a figure of speech, it's also a delusion.  They are playing, we are watching.  We are seperate from them.  Understand it or don't.

Of course, they're watching, and we're playing. That's why it's called a figure of speech.

[strosrays]

Quote:
I cant believe I read 7 pages of this. I need to get a life!

Won't help.

A paramecium has a life.  And I don't want to know what he thinks about anything, either.

[Phil_in_CS]

Quote:
I cant believe I read 7 pages of this. I need to get a life!

Set your profile to show 50 posts per page. Then you only have to read 3

[Jacksonian]

Quote:
This is exactly what I was said (although I said 2005 and not 2004 -- mea culpa, brain fart).  I'm not comparing Nash (or you) to Justice.  I'm just saying that at one time we also thought that Burke might be the next Biggio.  And Burke had more than 200 ABs at Michigan.  Not a terribly small sample size although it was at a low level.

No one that I know of who was posting to AC.com in 2001 saw Burke play that 1/2 season in Michigan.  All Nash or anyone else had were reports, mostly from Astros scouts.  That's why I wrote in an earlier post "...fans were a misled by the hype machine created by certain members of the 2001 Astros org ..."  We were misled by the hype.  Unfortunately the hype still exists.

[JimR]

not from Astros scouts...from publications like BP and BA. there were no connections to scouts.

[TangerineDream]

Quote:
 Biggio is Biggio and Burke is Burke.  Stop saying the 2 names in the same sentence.

Thank you!
 
And Everett is Everett and Burke is Burke. How could anyone seriously entertain the possibility that Burke could/would/should replace Everett? Enough with those two names in the same sentence as well.

I just think its great watching Burke to see what he will become. Plenty exciting!

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
Yeah it's a figure of speech, it's also a delusion.  They are playing, we are watching.  We are seperate from them.  Understand it or don't.

Of course, they're watching, and we're playing. That's why it's called a figure of speech.

Yeah I got that part.  What I dont get is how people who repeat that figure of speech tend to say things like "we should play Chris Burke at short" or "we should sign a petition requesting the team sign Carlos Beltran".

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
egggg... cellent. We pay. When you go to a movie do you yell at the screen? Do you write to the producer how you felt the lighting when Sam was carrying Frodo up the mountain should have had more shadows? Do you write books and articles about how you could have found more motivation for Zach Braff's character in the fireplace scene in Garden State? No, you don't. Yeah it's a figure of speech, it's also a delusion. They are playing, we are watching. We are seperate from them. Understand it or don't. Doesnt make it "overdone".  

Why do they have "Houston" emblazoned across their chests when they play on the orad then?

So they know what plane to get on?  Are you suggesting the city of Houston owns the team?

[Jacksonian]

Quote:
not from Astros scouts...from publications like BP and BA. there were no connections to scouts.

Astros scouts, at least in part.  And this is just one example:

The Link

Lakey said, "He kind of reminds me a little bit of (Craig) Biggio. I think he can be that kind of player."

[JimR]

oh, you meant published reports. yes.

[toddthebod]

Pravata.  I found it interesting that the Astros players who were interviewed about who should be the Texans first pick also used the term "we" to describe things the Texans should be doing.  Everyone here knows or should know that what they say or think isn't going to have any influence on what the Astros do.  Using the term "we" should not be taken as a delusional belief of control over the team.

[pravata]

Quote:
Pravata.  I found it interesting that the Astros players who were interviewed about who should be the Texans first pick also used the term "we" to describe things the Texans should be doing.  Everyone here knows or should know that what they say or think isn't going to have any influence on what the Astros do.  Using the term "we" should not be taken as a delusional belief of control over the team.

Does everyone?  I don't think they do.  And until people who type in those terms start acting as if it's only "a figure of speech" (dictionary definition - a phrase used to describe words that have no meaning. ?) I won't think so.  Why would you bring up the Astros to justify this kind of sloppy thinking?  Are they any less delusional because they're baseball players?

[BizidyDizidy]

Where on earth did you get that definition of figure of speech?

[pravata]

Quote:
Where on earth did you get that definition of figure of speech?

I. made. it. up. Based on the arguments for increasing the amount of identification with a sports team by using the word "we", seems to be the implication.  Patterns of speech have no influence on patterns of thought.

[MusicMan]

 Figure of speech

Quote:
Main Entry: figure of speech
: a form of expression (as a simile or metaphor) used to convey meaning or heighten effect often by comparing or identifying one thing with another that has a meaning or connotation familiar to the reader or listener

[shortstop]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Yeah it's a figure of speech, it's also a delusion.  They are playing, we are watching.  We are seperate from them.  Understand it or don't.

Of course, they're watching, and we're playing. That's why it's called a figure of speech.

Yeah I got that part.  What I dont get is how people who repeat that figure of speech tend to say things like "we should play Chris Burke at short" or "we should sign a petition requesting the team sign Carlos Beltran".

Wow ...

Thank you for pointing out that "we" are separate from the team and players. I lost my mind for a second there and thought that the folks that used "we" in their discussions were actually high level members of the front office staff or players on the team. I can't believe I have been so delusional. I guess I would not have made that egregious mistake if I read the banner that says "Unofficial Houston Astros Fansite" more closely. I will be forever indebted to you for making that astute point.

By the way, your Holy Emminace, I am truly amazed at how you find so much time to post here and still fulfill you duties as the Pontiff. The Catholic church should be commended for allowing you time off to enlighten us non players. (Please don't tell me you are not really a Pope.)

[BizidyDizidy]

My grandmother just told me about a woman who got up at the front of her church and asked the congregation to pray for a man who had just gotten into a life-threatening car accident, especially because he had just gotten married or had a kid or some kind of thing. Immediately half the women in the church had to keep themselves from laughing out loud because she was describing one of the main characters of her favorite soap opera (he lived, btw).

On the scale of crazy delusions, "we" for baseball teams is pretty harmless.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Is it me or does post quality go to shit during off-days?

[Limey]

Quote:
Is it me or does post quality go to shit during off-days?

Is it too early to talk beer?

Shiner's new Kolsch lager: discuss.

[pravata]

Why are you still wasting your time here?

[jaklewein]

Quote:
My grandmother just told me about a woman who got up at the front of her church and asked the congregation to pray for a man who had just gotten into a life-threatening car accident, especially because he had just gotten married or had a kid or some kind of thing. Immediately half the women in the church had to keep themselves from laughing out loud because she was describing one of the main characters of her favorite soap opera (he lived, btw).

On the scale of crazy delusions, "we" for baseball teams is pretty harmless.

Is the subject of using "we" in relation to a sports team really that popular of a topic?  To the point that people will argue/discuss it at great lengths (this isn't the first time this has come up)?  Can't both sides just agree to disagree and move on?

[pravata]

Quote:
My grandmother just told me about a woman who got up at the front of her church and asked the congregation to pray for a man who had just gotten into a life-threatening car accident, especially because he had just gotten married or had a kid or some kind of thing. Immediately half the women in the church had to keep themselves from laughing out loud because she was describing one of the main characters of her favorite soap opera (he lived, btw).

On the scale of crazy delusions, "we" for baseball teams is pretty harmless.

I want to avoid the whole relegion/soap opera thing.  Some people seem to be under some constraints to read this board and I'd rather not even hint at bringing those aspects into the discussion.  I'm not asking for any perspective on this.  The continued use of the term "we" identifying with sports teams causes some unfortunate trains of thought.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
oh, you meant published reports. yes.

Yup.

[BizidyDizidy]

Quote:

Quote:
My grandmother just told me about a woman who got up at the front of her church and asked the congregation to pray for a man who had just gotten into a life-threatening car accident, especially because he had just gotten married or had a kid or some kind of thing. Immediately half the women in the church had to keep themselves from laughing out loud because she was describing one of the main characters of her favorite soap opera (he lived, btw).

On the scale of crazy delusions, "we" for baseball teams is pretty harmless.

I want to avoid the whole relegion/soap opera thing.  Some people seem to be under some constraints to read this board and I'd rather not even hint at bringing those aspects into the discussion.  I'm not asking for any perspective on this.  The continued use of the term "we" identifying with sports teams causes some unfortunate trains of thought.

I admit that I haven't understood what you were trying to say with any of your posts today. Maybe you are using figures of speech. Anyway, I just wanted to say (which I thought was obvious) that the delusion in my story was not supposed to be about religion.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
My grandmother just told me about a woman who got up at the front of her church and asked the congregation to pray for a man who had just gotten into a life-threatening car accident, especially because he had just gotten married or had a kid or some kind of thing. Immediately half the women in the church had to keep themselves from laughing out loud because she was describing one of the main characters of her favorite soap opera (he lived, btw).

On the scale of crazy delusions, "we" for baseball teams is pretty harmless.

I want to avoid the whole relegion/soap opera thing.  Some people seem to be under some constraints to read this board and I'd rather not even hint at bringing those aspects into the discussion.  I'm not asking for any perspective on this.  The continued use of the term "we" identifying with sports teams causes some unfortunate trains of thought.

What I want to know is why if a person wants to keep clear of the "we", he is blasted as being some sort of high and mighty, above it all bastard.  Or at least that seems to be the inclination.

No one said *you* cannot use "we", all one says is "leave me out of the "WE"".  Is that so wrong?

[davek]

Quote:

Quote:
Is it me or does post quality go to shit during off-days?

Is it too early to talk beer?

Shiner's new Kolsch lager: discuss.

The most important thing to remember is that "Shiner" is Czechoslovakian for "crap"...

[BizidyDizidy]

Quote:


The most important thing to remember is that "Shiner" is Czechoslovakian for "crap"...

That should get some discussion going...

[Dobro]

Quote:
What I want to know is why if a person wants to keep clear of the "we", he is blasted as being some sort of high and mighty, above it all bastard.  

I've more frequently observed those who feel the use of the word "we" (mainly pravata) is inappropriate, tend to badger those who feel differently, not the other way around.

[Limey]

Quote:

Quote:
Shiner's new Kolsch lager: discuss.

The most important thing to remember is that "Shiner" is Czechoslovakian for "crap"...

I didn't think it was that bad.  It's a pilsner, clearly designed to attract drinkers of Heiniken, Becks or Grolsch.  Of course, why drink the pretender when you can drink the real thing?

[NeilT]

Just remember, we don't use we here.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:

Quote:
Is it me or does post quality go to shit during off-days?

Is it too early to talk beer?

Shiner's new Kolsch lager: discuss.

You start.  I've not had it before.

[Limey]

Quote:
You start.  I've not had it before.

Just did.  Crossed with your post.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
What I want to know is why if a person wants to keep clear of the "we", he is blasted as being some sort of high and mighty, above it all bastard.  

I've more frequently observed those who feel the use of the word "we" (mainly pravata) is inappropriate, tend to badger those who feel differently, not the other way around.

Mostly because I don't say we (which presumably includes me) should start Burke at short or trade Lidge or that Mclane should spend our 30 million dollars on a 3rd starter.  If anyone wants to type, "we, and by we I mean everyone but pravata" I'm ok with that.

[MusicMan]

For the most part, people are typing "we" as shorthand for "The Houston Astros baseball club, for whom I lend my emotional and, sometimes, financial support".  I understand the whole "we win, they lose" problem, but realistically, there are more glaring examples of stupidity to be attacked.

However, if anyone wants to add "we" to the Glossary to mean "the standard English usage of 'we', with the exception of pravata", that might help smooth things over.

[JJxvi]

 

Quote:
So they know what plane to get on? Are you suggesting the city of Houston owns the team?  

No, but the organization known as the "Houston Astros Baseball Club" actively and aggressively associates itself with the city of Houston, its residents, its businesses, and its charity organizations. The Club cultivates this symbiotic relationship with city ON PURPOSE in order to further its own business interests. In effect the Houston Astros place themselves in the position so that they represent the Houston area. They position themselves so that they represent the city in major league baseball.  It's no surprise then that the fans of the team use the term "we" when refering to their representation of us in MLB.

I have never really seen any proble with using the "we" or "they" when referring to sports teams. The only time it ever gets on my nerves is when someone who it would appear not to be represented by said team uses the term "we." ie an alum of a small college or university who is also a fan of a bigtime sports school referring to them as "us" or "we" despite no affiliation with the school or a bandwagon fan in another city latching onto a good team and using "we".  Still its nothing that I ever felt the need to confront anyone about.

[pravata]

Quote:
For the most part, people are typing "we" as shorthand for "The Houston Astros baseball club, for whom I lend my emotional and, sometimes, financial support".  I understand the whole "we win, they lose" problem, but realistically, there are more glaring examples of stupidity to be attacked.

However, if anyone wants to add "we" to the Glossary to mean "the standard English usage of 'we', with the exception of pravata", that might help smooth things over.

More glaring examples of stupidity?  Bring em on.

[NeilT]

I actually used the word "we" once.  I was watching the game a couple of weeks ago and my wife came in and said how are they doing and I said we're up by three.  I didn't think to exclude Pravata, but he's well worth excluding and if I'd thought of him I would have.  

The next morning I was driving to work and had this uncontrollable urge to call a talk radio station and urge that they replace Lidge as closer with Chris Burke.  I got one of those religious stations, though, and they didn't seem to know what I was talking about. But it made me feel good, and when I called I made sure to say We, meaning the Astros and me, should replace Lidge with Burke.

A couple of days later, as I was thinking about the Astros (which I probably think about more than's healthy anyway), I suddenly got this vision of myself in one of those jerseys, you know, a replica jersey.  Now it's my opinion that no man over 30 should ever be caught dead in a replica jersey because it leads to inappropriate identification with the team and wrong trains of thought, but I'll keep that to myself.  Anyway, I went out and bought one.  Not one of the tasteful ones, either, but one of those with pinstripes.  It had Burke on the back, and his number.  I was suddenly thinking that Burke should be the everyday catcher, in place of Ausmus.

So anyway, I was on the elevator that day, and it struck me that Burke should really replace Purpura.  I called Richard Justice and suggested it to him as the topic for his next column.  He hasn't written it yet.

The low point, though, was when I played shortstop.  Wednesday.  That wasn't Burke it was Me!  Me! We! Me! We! I hit pretty well, but I rushed that play.  Damn.

We won though.

[MusicMan]

Quote:
More glaring examples of stupidity?  Bring em on.

 This, for example.  Just saying that there's no need to nuke an ant hill.

[davek]

Quote:
I have never really seen any proble with using the "we" or "they" when referring to sports teams. The only time it ever gets on my nerves is when someone who it would appear not to be represented by said team uses the term "we." ie an alum of a small college or university who is also a fan of a bigtime sports school referring to them as "us" or "we" despite no affiliation with the school

They probably feel they have the same affiliation you do with the Astros... You know, buy a couple tickets a year, a jersey or Tshirt, maybe a cap?... Oh yeah and root, root, root for the bigtime... If it works for you why shouldn't it work for them?...

Quote:
or a bandwagon fan in another city latching onto a good team and using "we".  Still its nothing that I ever felt the need to confront anyone about.

So a bandwagon fan in Houston using "we" is cool but he should have his tongue cut out if he lives in Midland or El Paso?

How very progressive of you...

[Limey]

Quote:
Just saying that there's no need to nuke an ant hill.

It's the only way to be sure.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
More glaring examples of stupidity?  Bring em on.

 This, for example.  Just saying that there's no need to nuke an ant hill.

Why not?  Words are as precise as numbers.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
What I want to know is why if a person wants to keep clear of the "we", he is blasted as being some sort of high and mighty, above it all bastard.  

I've more frequently observed those who feel the use of the word "we" (mainly pravata) is inappropriate, tend to badger those who feel differently, not the other way around.

I don't speak for pravata.  I was the one who originally was responded to when I kiddingly replied to TTB that I'm not a part of "we".  Again, knock yourself out when you want to refer to yourself as part of the equation in terms of team management, team organization and of course ordering the buffett for the players that night.

I don't really care.

But if I say "I'm not a part of that we" (which is what I said eggszactly when *I* used *I* in my response... I didn't say to TTB... *you*), why is that an offense? (I'm still waiting for a response to my question).

[shortstop]

Quote:
Why are you still wasting your time here?

Because your pompous, know-it-all, self absobed rants are quite comical. Kind of like watching a monkey smear feces all over himself at the zoo.

... and because it's not often I get to read the baseball thoughts of a real Pontiff.

[davek]

Quote:

Quote:
Why are you still wasting your time here?

Because your pompous, know-it-all, self absobed rants are quite comical. Kind of like watching a monkey smear feces all over himself at the zoo.

... and because it's not often I get to read the baseball thoughts of a real Pontiff.

You got yourself a real hard-on about Pravata don't ya?..

Talked to your therapist about that yet?...

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Why are you still wasting your time here?

Because your pompous, know-it-all, self absobed rants are quite comical. Kind of like watching a monkey smear feces all over himself at the zoo.

... and because it's not often I get to read the baseball thoughts of a real Pontiff.

You got yourself a real hard-on about Pravata don't ya?..

Talked to your therapist about that yet?...

Must be the cologne pravata's wearing... or socks.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
Why are you still wasting your time here?

Because your pompous, know-it-all, self absobed rants are quite comical. Kind of like watching a monkey smear feces all over himself at the zoo.

... and because it's not often I get to read the baseball thoughts of a real Pontiff.

I can't help you there. Your contributions seem to consist entirely of how bored you are.  But if you want to present your opinion in a coherent way, instead of making faces at the monkey cage, I'll be happy to discuss it with you. Obviously.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Why are you still wasting your time here?

Because your pompous, know-it-all, self absobed rants are quite comical. Kind of like watching a monkey smear feces all over himself at the zoo.

... and because it's not often I get to read the baseball thoughts of a real Pontiff.

You got yourself a real hard-on about Pravata don't ya?..

Talked to your therapist about that yet?...

Must be the cologne pravata's wearing... or socks.

Argyles, they can't resist em.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Why are you still wasting your time here?

Because your pompous, know-it-all, self absobed rants are quite comical. Kind of like watching a monkey smear feces all over himself at the zoo.

... and because it's not often I get to read the baseball thoughts of a real Pontiff.

You got yourself a real hard-on about Pravata don't ya?..

Talked to your therapist about that yet?...

Must be the cologne pravata's wearing... or socks.

Argyles, they can't resist em.

Argyles = Beagle Magnets.

[T. J.]

Quote:

Additionally, rarely is a #1 pick in the mlb draft looked upon like an NBA or NFL #1 pick.  It is more "can't miss" in those sports than in the mlb.  

Looks like ESPN was reading this thread.  Today on Page 2 there's an article comparing the number 1 choices from the NFL, MLB, and NBA since 1980, ranking which league "won" that year.  Interesting reading (I thought so anyway):   Number Ones

[JimR]

fuck off, shortstop.

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

Argyles, they can't resist em.

Ha!  I've the way you dress...I'd be surprised if you're not wearing one black sock and one brown sock.

[davek]

Quote:
fuck off, shortstop.

Ever notice how few words lawyers use when it's not billable?...

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:

Argyles, they can't resist em.

Ha!  I've the way you dress...I'd be surprised if you're not wearing one black sock and one brown sock.

One brown, one orange.  Possibly incorporating a rainbow effect.

[davek]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Argyles, they can't resist em.

Ha!  I've the way you dress...I'd be surprised if you're not wearing one black sock and one brown sock.

One brown, one orange.  Possibly incorporating a rainbow effect.

Sad thing is they both started out white...

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:

Additionally, rarely is a #1 pick in the mlb draft looked upon like an NBA or NFL #1 pick.  It is more "can't miss" in those sports than in the mlb.  

Looks like ESPN was reading this thread.  Today on Page 2 there's an article comparing the number 1 choices from the NFL, MLB, and NBA since 1980, ranking which league "won" that year.  Interesting reading (I thought so anyway):   Number Ones

Thanks, should be innuresting reading!

[shortstop]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Why are you still wasting your time here?

Because your pompous, know-it-all, self absobed rants are quite comical. Kind of like watching a monkey smear feces all over himself at the zoo.

... and because it's not often I get to read the baseball thoughts of a real Pontiff.

You got yourself a real hard-on about Pravata don't ya?..

Talked to your therapist about that yet?...

No hard-on. He asked me a question. I simply gave him a 100% honest answer. I also despise argyles.

[shortstop]

Quote:
fuck off, shortstop.

You again...

Ouch, that's brilliant and really hurts my feelings.

You are Pope too, wow. Such language from a man of the cloth. I'm going to keep my children away from you.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I'm going to keep my children away from you.

That would apply to anyone on the TZ.  Hell, anyone on the internet.  And I'm not to sure about in and around your neighborhood either.

[JimR]

if you have children, someone loaned them to you.

[strosrays]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
What I want to know is why if a person wants to keep clear of the "we", he is blasted as being some sort of high and mighty, above it all bastard.  

I've more frequently observed those who feel the use of the word "we" (mainly pravata) is inappropriate, tend to badger those who feel differently, not the other way around.

Mostly because I don't say we (which presumably includes me) should start Burke at short or trade Lidge or that Mclane should spend our 30 million dollars on a 3rd starter.  If anyone wants to type, "we, and by we I mean everyone but pravata" I'm ok with that.

Here I had been thinking that all these people who use "we" had mice in their pockets.

Are you saying they don't?  Now I'm worried...

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
What I want to know is why if a person wants to keep clear of the "we", he is blasted as being some sort of high and mighty, above it all bastard.  

I've more frequently observed those who feel the use of the word "we" (mainly pravata) is inappropriate, tend to badger those who feel differently, not the other way around.

Mostly because I don't say we (which presumably includes me) should start Burke at short or trade Lidge or that Mclane should spend our 30 million dollars on a 3rd starter.  If anyone wants to type, "we, and by we I mean everyone but pravata" I'm ok with that.

Here I had been thinking that all these people who use "we" had mice in their pockets.

Are you saying they don't?  Now I'm worried...

Just Biggio.  The rest have imaginary friends, some of whom are millionaries, or billionaires, or baseball players, or all three.

[Limey]

Quote:
You are Pope too, wow. Such language from a man of the cloth. I'm going to keep my children away from you.

You should check the site glossary, then you wouldn't make a tit of yourself on something as simple as this.

[toddthebod]

Thanks Neil.  Best post I've read in a while.

Quote:
I actually used the word "we" once.  I was watching the game a couple of weeks ago and my wife came in and said how are they doing and I said we're up by three.  I didn't think to exclude Pravata, but he's well worth excluding and if I'd thought of him I would have.  

The next morning I was driving to work and had this uncontrollable urge to call a talk radio station and urge that they replace Lidge as closer with Chris Burke.  I got one of those religious stations, though, and they didn't seem to know what I was talking about. But it made me feel good, and when I called I made sure to say We, meaning the Astros and me, should replace Lidge with Burke.

A couple of days later, as I was thinking about the Astros (which I probably think about more than's healthy anyway), I suddenly got this vision of myself in one of those jerseys, you know, a replica jersey.  Now it's my opinion that no man over 30 should ever be caught dead in a replica jersey because it leads to inappropriate identification with the team and wrong trains of thought, but I'll keep that to myself.  Anyway, I went out and bought one.  Not one of the tasteful ones, either, but one of those with pinstripes.  It had Burke on the back, and his number.  I was suddenly thinking that Burke should be the everyday catcher, in place of Ausmus.

So anyway, I was on the elevator that day, and it struck me that Burke should really replace Purpura.  I called Richard Justice and suggested it to him as the topic for his next column.  He hasn't written it yet.

The low point, though, was when I played shortstop.  Wednesday.  That wasn't Burke it was Me!  Me! We! Me! We! I hit pretty well, but I rushed that play.  Damn.

We won though.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Quote:

Quote:
You are Pope too, wow. Such language from a man of the cloth. I'm going to keep my children away from you.

You should check the site glossary, then you wouldn't make a tit of yourself on something as simple as this.

I was wondering why he found his 'Holy See' references so humorous.  I hate to say it but you have to wonder what causes so many popes to congregate on one site?

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
You are Pope too, wow. Such language from a man of the cloth. I'm going to keep my children away from you.

You should check the site glossary, then you wouldn't make a tit of yourself on something as simple as this.

I was wondering why he found his 'Holy See' references so humorous.  I hate to say it but you have to wonder what causes so many popes to congregate on one site?

Two words - hats.

[strosrays]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
What I want to know is why if a person wants to keep clear of the "we", he is blasted as being some sort of high and mighty, above it all bastard.  

I've more frequently observed those who feel the use of the word "we" (mainly pravata) is inappropriate, tend to badger those who feel differently, not the other way around.

Mostly because I don't say we (which presumably includes me) should start Burke at short or trade Lidge or that Mclane should spend our 30 million dollars on a 3rd starter.  If anyone wants to type, "we, and by we I mean everyone but pravata" I'm ok with that.

Here I had been thinking that all these people who use "we" had mice in their pockets.

Are you saying they don't?  Now I'm worried...

Just Biggio.  The rest have imaginary friends...

Children, too, apparently.

[No? in Austin]

Any way this thread can be hijacked into something else, like...

Top Five Favorite Soda Pop?:

5. Big Red
4. Sprite
3. Cherry Coca Cola
2. 7-Up
1. Orange Crush

[NeilT]

Quote:
Any way this thread can be hijacked into something else, like...

Top Five Favorite Soda Pop?:

5. Big Red
4. Sprite
3. Cherry Coca Cola
2. 7-Up
1. Orange Crush

I was thinking about favorite rock albums from 1974.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
Any way this thread can be hijacked into something else, like...

Top Five Favorite Soda Pop?:

5. Big Red
4. Sprite
3. Cherry Coca Cola
2. 7-Up
1. Orange Crush

I was thinking about favorite rock albums from 1974.

Go hijack another thread... this bitch is mine!  Ahum... that Comedy Central thread looks prime for the pickin'.

[NeilT]

ok.  but you can only drink big red w/ barbeque or peanut patties.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
ok.  but you can only drink big red w/ barbeque or peanut patties.

What are you, some sort of pope ordering folks around and stuff... and why only "me" (as in you)... what's wrong with using "we" in that commandment, oh blessed one?  Damnit!

[NeilT]

Sorry.  When discussing etiquette, one should use "one".  One should only drink big red w/ barbecue or peanut patties.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Sorry.  When discussing etiquette, one should use "one".  One should only drink big red w/ barbecue or peanut patties.

Crawfish!  I call crawfishing on this one!  Come back here and fight!  Damn you!

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

Quote:
Any way this thread can be hijacked into something else, like...

Top Five Favorite Soda Pop?:

5. Big Red
4. Sprite
3. Cherry Coca Cola
2. 7-Up
1. Orange Crush

I was thinking about favorite rock albums from 1974.

Sorry Noe, I like this one better.

Not in particular order....

1.  Genesis - Lamb Lies Down on Broadway
2.  Eric Clapton - 461 Ocean Blvd.
3.  Bob Marley - Natty Dread
4.  Bad Company - Bad Company
5.  Lynyrd Skynyrd - Second Helping.

[T. J.]

Quote:
ok.  but you can only drink big red w/ barbeque or peanut patties.

Is that better than a Moon Pie and an RC Cola?  Or are they two sides of the same sugary coin?

[NeilT]

Quote:

Quote:
Sorry.  When discussing etiquette, one should use "one".  One should only drink big red w/ barbecue or peanut patties.

Crawfish!  I call crawfishing on this one!  Come back here and fight!  Damn you!

I never thought about that.  We didn't have crawfish where I grew up, only barbecue and peanut patties.  I guess you--I'm sorry, I mean one--can eat crawfish with big red if one wants.

It hardly seems right though.

[NeilT]

Quote:

Quote:
ok.  but you can only drink big red w/ barbeque or peanut patties.

Is that better than a Moon Pie and an RC Cola?  Or are they two sides of the same sugary coin?

Moon Pie and RC Cola is southern cuisine, peanut patty and Big Red is more western.  Very similar life experience, though.

[Astroholic]

I kind of prefer diet sprite (zero now) with stolichnaya, or diet coke, diet rite and Bacardi or just dos x.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Any way this thread can be hijacked into something else, like...

Top Five Favorite Soda Pop?:

5. Big Red
4. Sprite
3. Cherry Coca Cola
2. 7-Up
1. Orange Crush

I was thinking about favorite rock albums from 1974.

Sorry Noe, I like this one better.

Not in particular order....

1.  Genesis - Lamb Lies Down on Broadway
2.  Eric Clapton - 461 Ocean Blvd.
3.  Bob Marley - Natty Dread
4.  Bad Company - Bad Company
5.  Lynyrd Skynyrd - Second Helping.

I hate *you* all!  Or... ahum... I hate all of *you*... errr... ah... screw it!

BTW - I didn't pay much attention to rock albums in '74.  Try '76 and we'd get something started here.

[JimR]

one word: you never know

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

BTW - I didn't pay much attention to rock albums in '74.  Try '76 and we'd get something started here.

1976...Ah...now you're talking....I'd have to go up to the top 10...

1.  Eagles - Hotel California
2.  Ramones - Ramones
3.  Tom Waits - Small Change
4.  Kiss - Destroyer
5.  Thin Lizzy - Jailbreak
6.  AC/DC - Dirty Deeds
7.  Peter Frampton - Frampton Comes Alive
8.  Steve Miller Band - Fly Like an Eagle
9.  Boston - Boston
10. Rush - 2112

Wow, there were a lot of great albums in '76

[Limey]

Quote:
1976...Ah...now you're talking....I'd have to go up to the top 10...

1.  Eagles - Hotel California
2.  Ramones - Ramones
3.  Tom Waits - Small Change
4.  Kiss - Destroyer
5.  Thin Lizzy - Jailbreak
6.  AC/DC - Dirty Deeds
7.  Peter Frampton - Frampton Comes Alive
8.  Steve Miller Band - Fly Like an Eagle
9.  Boston - Boston
10. Rush - 2112

Wow, there were a lot of great albums in '76

Yeah, at least two.

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

Quote:
1976...Ah...now you're talking....I'd have to go up to the top 10...

1.  Eagles - Hotel California
2.  Ramones - Ramones
3.  Tom Waits - Small Change
4.  Kiss - Destroyer
5.  Thin Lizzy - Jailbreak
6.  AC/DC - Dirty Deeds
7.  Peter Frampton - Frampton Comes Alive
8.  Steve Miller Band - Fly Like an Eagle
9.  Boston - Boston
10. Rush - 2112

Wow, there were a lot of great albums in '76

Yeah, at least two.

Fuck you, you crumpet eating panty waste.

[JackAstro]

1. Root Beer (Whole Foods, A&W, Barq's or IBC)
2. Dr. Pepper
3. Coke
4. IBC Cream Soda
5. Sunkist / Orange Crush

Coke moves into the top spot with the addition of Jack.

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:
1. Root Beer (Whole Foods, A&W, Barq's or IBC)
2. Dr. Pepper
3. Coke
4. IBC Cream Soda
5. Sunkist / Orange Crush

Coke moves into the top spot with the addition of Jack.

Just open up your Coke and let it sit on the counter overnight, and you've got Dr. Pepper.

[Limey]

Quote:
Fuck you, you crumpet eating panty waste.

FWIW, I'd keep Lizzy and Frampton, nix the rest (just my Euro-upbringing, wasn't much into FM rock), and add Bowie's "Station to Station" and Blondie's "Blondie" (the latter being on the list as their debut album, not because it's their best).

Also, how could you miss off Heart's "Dreamboat Annie"?

Edit: I also seem to remember being the proud owner of ELO's "Out of the Blue" double album....on blue vinyl.  Now that's rock 'n' roll!

[HudsonHawk]

Quote:

Quote:
Fuck you, you crumpet eating panty waste.

FWIW, I'd keep Lizzy and Frampton, nix the rest (just my Euro-upbringing, wasn't much into FM rock), and add Bowie's "Station to Station" and Blondie's "Blondie" (the latter being on the list as their debut album, not because it's their best).

Also, how could you miss off Heart's "Dreamboat Annie"?

Any Cliff Richard albums that year you'd want to add?

[Astroholic]

how about Floyds animals or the Stones Black and Blue?

[Limey]

Quote:
Any Cliff Richard albums that year you'd want to add?

Try 1977 - not for Sir Cliff - but things got a lot more interesting:  Sex Pistols, Clash, Elvis...

[JimR]

holy shit. what has happened to this thread???

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
holy shit. what has happened to this thread???

My work is done here... oh and did "Aja" from Steely Dan come out in '76?  I can't remember if that 76, 77 or 78.  But then again, someone probably will tell me that is not rock and rock, that is a studio jazz product.

[Gizzmonic]

OK, now this is what gets me going.  You've got to demand REAL SUGAR in your soda.  None of this high fructose corn syrup shit.

5. Kosher/Mexican Coke (real sugar)
4. Cheerwine
3. St. Arnold's Root Beer
2. Napa Valley Orange Soda
1. Dublin Dr. Pepper (Nothing goes better with Knob Hill bourbon)

All of these can be purchased at the downtown spec's.  And yes, sometimes I spend more on soda than booze...

Quote:
1. Root Beer (Whole Foods, A&W, Barq's or IBC)
2. Dr. Pepper
3. Coke
4. IBC Cream Soda
5. Sunkist / Orange Crush

Coke moves into the top spot with the addition of Jack.

[Astroholic]

Damn I like Knob Hill.  Thanks for making my last hour at work a long one.

[JJxvi]

We hate this thread.

[Limey]

Quote:
We hate this thread.

He hate we.

[davek]

Quote:
OK, now this is what gets me going.  You've got to demand REAL SUGAR in your soda.  None of this high fructose corn syrup shit.

5. Kosher/Mexican Coke (real sugar)
4. Cheerwine
3. St. Arnold's Root Beer
2. Napa Valley Orange Soda
1. Dublin Dr. Pepper (Nothing goes better with Knob Hill bourbon)

All of these can be purchased at the downtown spec's.  And yes, sometimes I spend more on soda than booze...
 

Cheerwine is one of the few beverages in this world that is nastier than Shiner...

[NeilT]

1974

461 Ocean Blvd
Band on the Run.  Sorry.  
Court and Spark
Maria Muldaur

I could only come up w/ 4.  Two of those are from 1973.

1976
Joan Armatrading
Blondie
Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers
Rastaman Vibrations
Black and Blue

Soda Pops

This was really hard.

5.  Diet Coke
4.  Dr. Brown's Black Cherry Soda
3.  Root Beer.  A&W in a frosty mug.
2.  orange cream soda
1.  Dr. Pepper.

[Col. Sphinx Drummond]

I've come to the conclusion that it's not my place in the 9 to 5 world. I've been having trouble with the 3rd line manager at work. My boss wont do anything about it and neither will his boss. I wish Chris "The Hit-Man" Burke would pay them a visit.

Also, the Ramones were so much more than the first punk rock band (that was the Stooges anyway). Their stuff still sounds fresh. I miss Joey, Johnny, & Dee Dee.

[Astroholic]

He hate me.

[Lionstone]

Quote:
Any way this thread can be hijacked into something else, like...

Top Five Favorite Soda Pop?:

5. Big Red
4. Sprite
3. Cherry Coca Cola
2. 7-Up
1. Orange Crush

1. Black Cherry & Vanilla Coke
2. Pepsi
3. Dr. Pepper, but only from a fountain
4. IBC Cream Soda
5. Big Red Vanilla Float

I can hardly ever find #5, except at some of those wal-mart sized gas stations that you find from time to time.  Those places have every flavor of soda imaginable.

[JackAstro]

Quote:

Quote:
1. Root Beer (Whole Foods, A&W, Barq's or IBC)
2. Dr. Pepper
3. Coke
4. IBC Cream Soda
5. Sunkist / Orange Crush

Coke moves into the top spot with the addition of Jack.

Just open up your Coke and let it sit on the counter overnight, and you've got Dr. Pepper.

Only after you squeeze in a hint of prune juice, or whatever the hell that is. Somehow it works.

[David in Jackson]

Quote:
holy shit. what has happened to this thread???

Just checked in for the first time this afternoon.

[JackAstro]

Quote:
Also, the Ramones were so much more than the first punk rock band (that was the Stooges anyway). Their stuff still sounds fresh. I miss Joey, Johnny, & Dee Dee.

Agreed. Though I don't miss Dee Dee. I do miss Tommy, however, and he's not even dead.

[NeilT]

Well, if you think about it, it's obvious.  We've gone from Crimson Chin to Big Red.  Isn't that a logical progression?

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
1. Root Beer (Whole Foods, A&W, Barq's or IBC)
2. Dr. Pepper
3. Coke
4. IBC Cream Soda
5. Sunkist / Orange Crush

Coke moves into the top spot with the addition of Jack.

Just open up your Coke and let it sit on the counter overnight, and you've got Dr. Pepper.

Only after you squeeze in a hint of prune juice, or whatever the hell that is. Somehow it works.

You have to leave the roach in that crawled in overnight. Mmmm, chitin-y.

[JackAstro]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
1. Root Beer (Whole Foods, A&W, Barq's or IBC)
2. Dr. Pepper
3. Coke
4. IBC Cream Soda
5. Sunkist / Orange Crush

Coke moves into the top spot with the addition of Jack.

Just open up your Coke and let it sit on the counter overnight, and you've got Dr. Pepper.

Only after you squeeze in a hint of prune juice, or whatever the hell that is. Somehow it works.

You have to leave the roach in that crawled in overnight. Mmmm, chitin-y.

Oh shit, is that what it is? OK, I'm bumping it down a spot to #3.

Incidentally, someone slapped a Stewart's Orange 'n Cream in my hand, and it kicks the ass. I'm not revising the list further on account of being lazy and all, but that is some tasty high fructose corn syrup right there.

[NeilT]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
1. Root Beer (Whole Foods, A&W, Barq's or IBC)
2. Dr. Pepper
3. Coke
4. IBC Cream Soda
5. Sunkist / Orange Crush

Coke moves into the top spot with the addition of Jack.

Just open up your Coke and let it sit on the counter overnight, and you've got Dr. Pepper.

Only after you squeeze in a hint of prune juice, or whatever the hell that is. Somehow it works.

You have to leave the roach in that crawled in overnight. Mmmm, chitin-y.

Oh shit, is that what it is? OK, I'm bumping it down a spot to #3.

Incidentally, someone slapped a Stewart's Orange 'n Cream in my hand, and it kicks the ass. I'm not revising the list further on account of being lazy and all, but that is some tasty high fructose corn syrup right there.

That was the Orange Cream soda I was trying to think of.  Great stuff.

[strosrays]

Do they still make Jolt Cola?  IIRC, "twice the sugar, four times the caffiene."

Anyway, a few LP's left over from 1974:

Up For The Down Stroke - Parliament
The Mirror - Spooky Tooth
It's Only Rock And Roll - Rolling Stones
Bridge Of Sighs - Robin Trower
Muscle Of Love - Alice Cooper
Paper Money - Montrose
Standing On The Verge Of Getting It On - Funkadelic
Sally Can't Dance - Lou Reed
On The Beach - Neil Young
Todd - Todd Rundgren
Pretzel Logic - Steely Dan
Gag A Maggot - Swamp Dogg
Hot Wire - Trapeze
Heroes Are Hard To Find - Fleetwood Mac
Diamond Dogs - David Bowie

and, of course

Tres Hombres - ZZ Top  (now I'm hungry for Tex-Mex for some reason... )

[BizidyDizidy]

I only drink diet sodas, but here goes:

1. Jones Diet Black Cherry (If you haven't tried Jones, I really recommend them. You can get them at target or starbucks - but go to target for all the flavors, including a full thanksgiving dinner kit).

2. Diet Sunkist

3. Diet Barq's

4. Diet Cherry Vanilla Dr. Pepper.

5. Diet Sprite

[Col. Sphinx Drummond]

God dammit, I'm no good at ranking things I either like something or don't like it. Aside from those already mentioned these are a few more of the records I listened and liked to in 1974.

Frank Zappa - Apostrophe
J Geils Band -  Nightmares...and Other Tales From the Vinyl Jungle
Deep Purple -  Who Do We Think We Are
Badfinger -  Wish You Were Here
John Lennon -  Walls and Bridges
Bob Dylan -  Planet Waves
Al Green - Al Green Explores Your Mind
Queen -  Sheer Heart Attack
Jimmy Buffett -  Living and Dying in 3/4 Time and  A1A
Rolling Stones -  It's Only Rock 'N Roll
Steel Dan - Pretzel Logic
Bachman-Turner Overdrive -  Not Fragile
Emerson Lake and Palmer -  Welcome Back My Friends to the Show That Never Ends
King Crimson -  Starless and Bible Black
Mahvishnu Orchestra -  Apocalypse
Foghat -  Energized
Jerry Jeff Walker - Viva Terligua
Jesse Colin Young -  Light Shine
Randy Newman -  Good Old Boys
Willie Nelson -  Phases and Stages
Bebop Delux -  Axe Victim
Stevie Wonder -  Fulfillingness' First Finale
Freddie King -  Burglar

[TangerineDream]

Quote:

Quote:
Is it me or does post quality go to shit during off-days?

Is it too early to talk beer?

Shiner's new Kolsch lager: discuss.

It ain't new and it tastes like Vegemite.

Blaahhhh!

[otterj]

The thread to jizz on all threads.

Jizz.