I'm having a difficult time charting this Darin Erstad-Brian Anderson saga. Since
Kenny Williams brought up winter ball, a couple of interesting quotes have arisen in the papers. From
Joe Cowley's piece in the Sun-Times:
''I've seen so many guys come into this level, struggle, have to take a
step back to take two steps forward,'' Williams said. ''If you give up
on every one of your young players because they haven't had success
right off the bat, I don't know if you'll have much of a team left. I
would disagree that [Anderson's] better off somewhere else.''
And
in some notes also from the Sun-Times:
General manager Ken Williams is well aware that manager Ozzie Guillen might not have the patience for struggling outfielder Brian Anderson
at times, but Williams said that's to be expected of Guillen. ''When
you don't have a player-development background, or any background with
developing young players, that's something you have to acquire on the
way,'' Williams said. ''You don't step into this job and have a full
grasp of it. I have no complaints on how Ozzie handles the young
players, but it will get better as time goes on.''
(The former piece also includes an awful Cowley line, "Rowand would run
through a wall because he was told to. Anderson would run through a
wall because it seemed fun and could land him a few 'honeys' along
the way." Between that and
the "Dude, Where's My Car?" reference, I think he has a warped perspective on West Coasters. At least I learned what AP style is for "honeys.")
That was on Friday. On Saturday, the papers figured Anderson would get the start,
as did I. We were all wrong, as Erstad started in center field against lefty Nate Robertson and predictably went 0-for-5 in the
Sox's 10-inning, 7-5 victory. On
South Side Sox, somebody mentioned that Hawk Harrelson grudgingly admitted Erstad is stinking up the joint, but I had Detroit's feed and couldn't enjoy it myself. Anderson did enter the game as a pinch runner and scored the tying run, and was shortly yanked thereafter, in what was rather bizarre usage.
Ozzie's rationale for not starting Anderson?
The Trib's Mark Gonzalez reports:
Guillen said he elected not to start Anderson because he didn't want to start him in the same lineup with rookie catcher Gustavo Molina. Anderson and Molina were a combined 1-for-14 before Saturday.
So, if I'm getting this right, Anderson's playing time is now dictated by the presence of Molina, a backup catcher who still doesn't have a major-league hit to his credit, because playing two rookies against a lefty would be far, far worse than playing one rookie and a guy who is 1-for-13 (now 1-for-16) against lefties since Opening Day? The only way Anderson could be provably worse is to give him enough chances to go hitless over four games or so, and we know that's not going to happen.