PDA

View Full Version : Is Carlos Beltran now overrated?



wabio
06-18-04, 07:41 PM
With all the recent free-agent/trade rumors going around, I think this guys stock has been over-inflated, especially with Boras as his agent. Granted he's a good player.....good hitter, fast on the bases, and consistent year after year.....but he's not as good as the media makes him sound. He's never hit more than 30 HRs, barely breaks the 100 RBI and .300 BA mark, and he strikes out quite a bit. As of right now he's not even in the Top 40 in OPS. And he plays centerfield, where would we put him if we traded for him? If we are going after position players, wouldn't it make more sense to unload Cairo and/or Wilson and get a good second baseman?


http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?statsId=6132

Worm
06-18-04, 08:13 PM
Beltran is the hot name simply because he's arguably the best player available for trade or as a FA in the offseason. He's the popular pick but the Yankees need arms, not bats.

WakefieldsCrewSox
06-19-04, 12:42 AM
I haven't looked at his career numbers much, but I think in the context of this season he has been highly overrated, yes.

Yosef
06-19-04, 01:37 AM
Definitely overrated. Better than Bernie, but I wouldn't trade for him. Hopefully we wait until the offseason.

SoxFanXL
06-19-04, 03:10 AM
Yep... i think he's VERY overrated.

parkerstrong
06-21-04, 12:48 AM
Vlad is much better than Beltran and he got 14 mil a year. Beltran doesnt deserve more than that. I hope we don't over pay for Beltran.

Coney36
06-21-04, 02:08 AM
I hope he's not... he's one of my OFs! :uhh:

cubswin
06-21-04, 02:56 AM
Originally posted by parkerstrong
Vlad is much better than Beltran and he got 14 mil a year. Beltran doesnt deserve more than that. I hope we don't over pay for Beltran.



He doesn't compare as a player, but it could be a different market this offseason, he doesn't have the injury question hanging over his head and if he doesn't demand as many years, he could get a bump up in $/yr.

WIZ
06-21-04, 09:16 AM
There is no incentive for Beltran to negotiate with one club when many can be pitted against each other in the offseason.The chances of this happening are slim to none.Throw in the Boras factor and it's less than zero.

EdmundDantes
06-21-04, 09:41 AM
Do a comparison between Betlran's numbers to date versus Damon's numbers at the same point in his career. You might be surprised. Do I think he will turn into another Damon? No, but it does make you think that the asking price is extremely high for a guy that may end up being a 3 month rental for anyone not willing to pay top dollar to keep him.

The Yankees will most likely be able to pay, but very few other teams will be able to give him the 16+ million a year contract borass wants. The Red Sox may be able to pay, but it seriously hampers there other free agent signings, and it will cost them too much cheap young talent just to get him out of KC.

JavyVazquezIsSick
06-21-04, 12:17 PM
I don't think he is one of the best players in the league offensively. But can you name 3 CFers you would like to have over him?

RhodeyYankee2638
06-21-04, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by JavyVazquezIsSick
I don't think he is one of the best players in the league offensively. But can you name 3 CFers you would like to have over him?

Jim Edmonds Scott Podsenik Rocco Baldelli

I kid you not either

Yankee Bulldawg
06-21-04, 12:36 PM
Unfortunatley i see George going one of his raids again and will order Cashman to do whatever it takes to get Beltran, rather then realize his team needs pitching & not batting

JavyVazquezIsSick
06-21-04, 12:43 PM
Originally posted by RhodeyYankee2638


Jim Edmonds Scott Podsenik Rocco Baldelli

I kid you not either

The only person I can agree with you simply because of his age and potential is Rocco Baldelli. That said at this point and time Baldelli isn't a better player than Beltran....

Edmonds is 33 and Scott is not only older than Beltran but not as good both power and hitting wise....

RhodeyYankee2638
06-21-04, 12:55 PM
Originally posted by JavyVazquezIsSick


The only person I can agree with you simply because of his age and potential is Rocco Baldelli. That said at this point and time Baldelli isn't a better player than Beltran....

Edmonds is 33 and Scott is not only older than Beltran but not as good both power and hitting wise....

Although Edmonds is 33, he is still nasty in the field and at the plate. And for some reason, i have always liked Scott P.

JavyVazquezIsSick
06-21-04, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by RhodeyYankee2638


Although Edmonds is 33, he is still nasty in the field and at the plate. And for some reason, i have always liked Scott P.

Yeah but I wouldn't want Edmonds over Beltran. This team needs no more aging players. As for Scott I don't really get your fascination with him but whatever floats your boat....:dunno:

chanman7483
06-21-04, 01:53 PM
Personally, I'd love to have the guy - - he reminds me of bernie, circa late 90s. Good contact, speed(although Beltran has considerably more), good power(25-35 hrs) and on top of all of that he's a switch hitter. He's a great player.

That being said, do I think he's what the media makes him out to be? a Boras player who'll be demanding top dollar(16 mil+) per yr? the answer is a resounding no.

chanman7483
06-21-04, 01:56 PM
Originally posted by RhodeyYankee2638


Jim Edmonds Scott Podsenik Rocco Baldelli

I kid you not either

3 great choices.

Personally, I'd take Scotty P b/c of his combination of skill and youth. He's also got GREAT speed to boot. Baldelli is both young and quick but scotty has more power and overall ability i believe. Edmonds is getting a little older and is very much injury prone. However i was very shocked to see that he's only 33.. seems as if he's been around forever.

cubswin
06-21-04, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by chanman7483


3 great choices.

Personally, I'd take Scotty P b/c of his combination of skill and youth. He's also got GREAT speed to boot. Baldelli is both young and quick but scotty has more power and overall ability i believe. Edmonds is getting a little older and is very much injury prone. However i was very shocked to see that he's only 33.. seems as if he's been around forever.



Baldelli has a long way to go. I don't know if he has upside greater than what Beltran already is doing. Podsednik is better value, but I on't think he's even comparable to Beltran, and I'm not sure that at 28 he has a lot of upside. Edmonds is a guy I would take for the short-term, as I think he's flat-out better; but Beltran obviously is the guy to go with if you have to give a long (ie, > 4 yrs) contract.

Irony Of It All
06-21-04, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by EdmundDantes
Do a comparison between Betlran's numbers to date versus Damon's numbers at the same point in his career. You might be surprised. Do I think he will turn into another Damon? No, but it does make you think that the asking price is extremely high for a guy that may end up being a 3 month rental for anyone not willing to pay top dollar to keep him.

Beltran thus far is comparable with players such as Andre Dawson, Bobby Bonds, Harold Baines, Dave Winfield, Gary Sheffield, and Billy Williams. I really don't see the comparison between someone like Damon and Beltran.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/beltrca01.shtml

Irony Of It All
06-21-04, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by cubswin




Baldelli has a long way to go. I don't know if he has upside greater than what Beltran already is doing. Podsednik is better value, but I on't think he's even comparable to Beltran, and I'm not sure that at 28 he has a lot of upside. Edmonds is a guy I would take for the short-term, as I think he's flat-out better; but Beltran obviously is the guy to go with if you have to give a long (ie, > 4 yrs) contract.

Agreed on all points. Unless Baldelli learns some plate discilpline, I don't think he'll ever be that great of a player.

JavyVazquezIsSick
06-21-04, 02:22 PM
As good of a player Beltran is, he is in no way worth 16+ mil a year....Pujols is being paid 9 mil a year and Beltran isn't near Puljos offensive output...

Irony Of It All
06-21-04, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by JavyVazquezIsSick
As good of a player Beltran is, he is in no way worth 16+ mil a year....Pujols is being paid 9 mil a year and Beltran isn't near Puljos offensive output...

I agree with you about Beltran but Pujols is making much more than 9 million a year...

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1739895

cubswin
06-21-04, 02:27 PM
Originally posted by JavyVazquezIsSick
As good of a player Beltran is, he is in no way worth 16+ mil a year....Pujols is being paid 9 mil a year and Beltran isn't near Puljos offensive output...


"worth" has only a partial relationship to what Pujols or anybody else makes

JavyVazquezIsSick
06-21-04, 02:28 PM
Originally posted by Irony Of It All


I agree with you about Beltran but Pujols is making much more than 9 million a year...

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1739895

Yeah I meant to say 7mil not 9 but yeah I know about that contract I think it works out roughly around 14 mil a year....I want Beltran but I really don't think he is going to be worth the contract he is going to get....

RhodeyYankee2638
06-21-04, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by JavyVazquezIsSick


Yeah but I wouldn't want Edmonds over Beltran. This team needs no more aging players. As for Scott I don't really get your fascination with him but whatever floats your boat....:dunno:

Scott is young, quick, perfect leadoff man, good defensive centerfielder and, oh ya, is stealing bases at a 95% clip

JavyVazquezIsSick
06-21-04, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by RhodeyYankee2638


Scott is young, quick, perfect leadoff man, good defensive centerfielder and, oh ya, is stealing bases at a 95% clip

Not syaing he isn't good but I don't understand how you think he is better than Beltran....

RhodeyYankee2638
06-21-04, 03:12 PM
Originally posted by JavyVazquezIsSick


Not syaing he isn't good but I don't understand how you think he is better than Beltran....

I think Scott is better (better fit for this team) for a couple reasons.......

1) We don't need another number 3 or 4 hitter on this team
2) We do not have a true leadoff man
3) Can provide the same level of defense
4) Will cost 14-15 million dollars less than Beltran

Irony Of It All
06-21-04, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by RhodeyYankee2638


I think Scott is better (better fit for this team) for a couple reasons.......

1) We don't need another number 3 or 4 hitter on this team
2) We do not have a true leadoff man
3) Can provide the same level of defense
4) Will cost 14-15 million dollars less than Beltran

1. Beltran can hit anywhere in the lineup.
2. Bernie, Jeter, or Beltran are all more than capable of being great leadoff hitters.
3. I have no idea.
4. True, but there's no way in hell the Brewers are even considering trading him at this point.

RhodeyYankee2638
06-21-04, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by Irony Of It All

4. True, but there's no way in hell the Brewers are even considering trading him at this point.

I know, but JVIS wanted to know if there were 3 centerfielders I would rather have than Beltran, and Scotty was one of them

Irony Of It All
06-21-04, 03:21 PM
Originally posted by RhodeyYankee2638


I know, but JVIS wanted to know if there were 3 centerfielders I would rather have than Beltran, and Scotty was one of them

Ahhh, I see now.

JavyVazquezIsSick
06-21-04, 05:35 PM
Originally posted by RhodeyYankee2638


I know, but JVIS wanted to know if there were 3 centerfielders I would rather have than Beltran, and Scotty was one of them

Still I don't see any reason why you would want Scott over Beltran. You could never have enough 3 or 4 guys who can bat realistically anywhere in the lineup. Like Irony, I agree that both Jeter and Bernie are capable of lead off hitters and I would much rather have Beltran be behind them somewhere with his kind of power.

I am not quite sure about defense although Scott has had a better fielding percentage over the last couple years, it doesn't necessarily mean he is a better centerfielder. For example, in 2003 Bernie was tied for 1st with 2 others in fielding percentage but it doesn't mean he is actually a better fielder than those below him...

Beltran is leading the entire league by a CF in assist this year (leading soctt by 3) and last year led Scott by 7. I really don't know who is better because I don't get a chance to see both enough in action so I don't know who gets the edge in defense.

As for costing 14-15 mil less, you are speculating here. First off Scott isn't a free agent but if he was who knows how much money he would get. Secondly, we don't know how much Boras is going to be asking so to speculate that Scott would cost 14-15 mil less is far-fetched....

parkerstrong
06-22-04, 04:34 AM
Beltran isnt worth 14 mil a year...not to mention we would have to commit long-term. 6 or 7 year deal is too long to give out.