Supporting the San Francisco Giants since April 19, 2006
posted by Big D at 5:43 PM
I like Accardo. A lot, actually. but I don't think you can call the trade disastrous. Actually, it was a hell of a good trade. For Accardo, who really hadn't done much, other than show a lot of potential, we got a 290 hitting corner IF and Chulk, who was really almost a throw in. First, who would have predicted that Hillenbrand would go from a 290 hitter to a 240 hitter in a matter of days? And while chulk doesn't have the upside or potential of Accardo, he is a solid and damn reliable RP (w/ an ERA near 3.50 in 2 of the last 3 years).
I'm glad you think Chulk is a good signing. I'd still rather have Accardo. And anyone should have seen that Hillenbrand's stats aren't that good for a corner IF (he never walks and doesn't have much power); additionally, he'd played in 3 parks (Banc One, Fenway and Skydome) that tend to inflate offensive stats. Here are his year-by-year and career stats--http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/hillesh02.shtmlHis presumed problem of being a headcase actually wasn't a problem in SF; he just didn't hit worth a damn, which shouldn't have been that hard to figure might happen. In any case, I stand by my evaluation -- yet another terrible trade by Sabean.
Post a Comment
Create a Link
View my complete profile