Tuesday a.m. Rangers stuff
by Adam J. Morris on Feb 16, 2010 9:16 AM CST
Email
PrintSo, we have the big Endy Chavez signing this morning. T.R. Sullivan says that Chavez is ahead of schedule on rehabbing his knee, but isn't expected to be ready to start the season. Sullivan also mentions that Craig Gentry and Brandon Boggs are expected to start the season in AAA, which is noteworthy primarily because there had been some thought that Gentry would start the season as the Rangers' 25th man.
Jeff Wilson says that there are six players fighting for the last bench spot, although he doesn't mention who they are. I'm guessing, right now, it is Matt Brown, Joaquin Arias, Esteban German, Brandon Boggs, Craig Gentry, and Chavez. I'm starting to think that, if I had to pick someone now, I'd say Brown will be the guy, because of his history of hitting lefties well.
Wilson also has a story about Josh Hamilton, saying that Hamilton's 2009 season starting going awry when, after the 2008 season, he chose baseball over "faith and family" by choosing to work out in Arizona for a month. It isn't often you see a story criticizing a player for choosing to spend more time in the offseason working on his baseball activities.
Richard Durrett takes a look at the right field situation today at the ESPN Dallas Rangers blog, and in particular, Nelson Cruz. He gets bonus points for a UZR reference in talking about Cruz's defense.
Evan Grant is doing his top 25 Rangers prospects at the DMN Rangers blog, with 21-25 going up here, and 16-20 here. Leury Garcia jumps out at me, ranked 21st, ahead of Wilfredo Boscan and Neil Ramirez. Garcia has gotten good marks with some folks, but he's tiny and doesn't look like he's likely to ever hit -- even Grant compares him to former Ranger prospect Hanley Frias -- which makes me wonder why he'd be slotted so high.
474 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Go Rangers!
"Drinks are on me if Lewis posts >168IP and an era lower than 3.86." by RangerMad on Jan 20, 2010 12:36 PM PST
I dunno much about Matt Brown,
but what is there to be excited about? His numbers look pretty bad and he’s 24. I’ve heard he can hit lefties, but his numbers imply that he can’t hit them that well. Great defense?
You may be looking at the wrong Matt Brown
Brown is 27 with hardly any ML experience and although he has good minor league numbers against LHP I hope hes not brought up to platoon with Davis. I would rather see Davis out there and see if he can get back to his pre-2009 splits which he is pretty decent against LHP.
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
So I was working out on one of those StairMasters with a television on it
this past Sunday and after watching Game 6 of the ’86 World Series (ESPN Classic), I finally figured out who Josh Hamilton reminds me of as a player – Darryl Strawberry.
Both threw and batted left, were middle of the order COFs, fast as hell and could hit the ball a mile.
Both players were the number one pick of their draft and they both had serious substance abuse problems.
My favorite all-time players to watch have been those with copious amounts of power & speed. Aaron had stopped running and Mays was at the end when I saw them but I loved me some Bobby Bonds, Joe Morgan and Reggie Jax when I was growing up. It’s probably why I used to like Soriano & Kenneth so much and why I appreciated the greatness of Barry Bonds pre-steroids.
Josh is one of the most entertaining players I’ve ever seen play the game. He’s a combo platter of Willie McCovey & Willie Davis. He’s one of those players who can affect the game at any time with one of his talents. He is one of the very few players I love watching go from first to third on a single or if you really wanna see my baseball pants go for a stroll, watching him hit a triple is phenomenal. On top of all that, he can hit the ball 500 feet.
That said, Josh really needs to stfu with the excuses about losing focus, bible study and medication. He’s 29 years old and it’s time for that second professional year of health & sobriety where he plays more than 96 games.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
Im curious why you chose to reply to my comment with that
Its a great comment you wrote and I agree with what you said. Hoever it has nothing to do with Matt Brown which you replied to.
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
It just happened.
I guess I could have not hit reply before I started writing but I don’t worry as muc h about that breach of LSB etiquette as others do in here.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
Because Wails likes having his comments towards the top
If he posted at the bottom like he’s supposed to he’s worried we’ll miss his pearls of wisdom.
"You promised me, Eckstein, that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I noticed that during the most trying periods of my life, there have only been one set of prints in the sand. Why, when I have needed you most, have you not been there for me?" David Eckstein replied, "Because my little legs had gotten tired, and you were carrying me." And I looked down and saw that I was still carrying David Eckstein.
Then he grounded out weakly to second.
Eric Davis
was on of my favorites. Back to back seasons of 27/80 and 37/50 while only get caught stealing 17 times.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 9:55 AM CST up reply actions
Canseco '88 (42 HR / 40 SB) fits into that category as
well but that’s before we definitively knew he was on the juice.
Ricky Henderson was at his most devastating when he was hitting 24-28 HR’s / year and then doing everything else he did as a lead-off man.
I’m lathering Josh with praise for his ability to do this but Kinsler (smack in his prime this year) is perfectly capable of putting up a 40/40 if everything breaks right.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 10:00 AM CST up reply actions
id say
that Kinsler has the best chance of a 40/40 season in all of MLB. Hanley Ramirez and Matt Kemp would be the next two in line IMO.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 10:10 AM CST up reply actions
I think Kemp would have to get out of LA to pull it off
However, Hanley is my bet. He plays in that pit, and still mashes. I shudder to think how good Boston would be if they had held on to him.
Your 2009 Snow Monkey Ambassador
You are probably
right on Kemp. I have a feeling that Ramirez is going to put up one of those all time seasons (.360/.450/.600 w/ 50 or so steals) pretty soon. He is my second favorite player to watch behind pujols in MLB.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 10:24 AM CST up reply actions
Love watching Josh go 1st to 3rd....that dude takes like 4 strides between bases.
Freak of nature.
I expect a monster year from him this year.
"Sometimes you just want to sit back and watch somebody throw 100." - Jeff Passan on Neftali Feliz
"Baseball's all that's real" - JB
I like watching Josh jog around the bases myself..
I’m always afraid he may hurt something going from 1st to 3rd and yes he will indeed have a huge year with Big Daddy Vladdy coming to the rescue.
I did not ask you if you have herpes. I said is that a hairpiece?!?
Has anybody ever had a blueberry cobbler?
I’ve never had one before, but it seems like it would be delicious.
I think
BlueBell has a blueberry cobbler and Vanilla flavor
People have told me that
but sadly i live 1000 miles away from Blue Bell ice cream right now.
Go Rice Owls!
Why???
Surely you didn’t do that to yourself. Have you been kidnapped?
"You'll meet them again on their long journey to the middle." -Lester Bangs
Rescue mission?
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
by GhettoBear04 on Feb 16, 2010 11:20 AM CST up reply actions
I'm so old
I actually saw Mays in 61 at old Colt stadium. My all time favorite player
MLB Network showed a lot of vintage
Mays footage on that 2 hour special he had with Bob Costas. He glided everywhere he went.
The only Mays I remember seeing was the 1969-73 player. He was usable and contributed, at least until the ‘73 post-season but that’s when he was 38-42 years old so I can forgive.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 10:41 AM CST up reply actions
That special was great
Can’t get enough Willie Mays. It could have been 6 hours long and I would have eaten up the whole thing.
Of course, part of it may be that I’m starving for any kind of baseball right now…
meta-signature
Good point.
That fits extraordinarily well…I wonder if a connection hadn’t been made previously because of the race difference?
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
by GhettoBear04 on Feb 16, 2010 11:29 AM CST up reply actions
Nice comp, JW
I always pictured a right-handed Ellis Valentine.
http://z.lee28.tripod.com/sbnsforgottenintime/id12.html
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
^ left handed Valentine
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
.936 career OPS in the minors against lefties
He’s not someone I’d ever want getting significant playing time, since he’s pretty much useless against righties, but as the 25th man I’d be fine if seeing if he can be a Jonny Gomes-lite.
Morality you can fake. Fun you either have or you don't.
You sure are up early jonny boy
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure y'all will)
But isn’t Gentry kinda the same thing as Chavez? Besides being a righty vs. lefty, their both Fast, good outfielder, not much bat. What’s the diff here?
"Drinks are on me if Lewis posts >168IP and an era lower than 3.86." by RangerMad on Jan 20, 2010 12:36 PM PST
no, you're right on that one
just extra insurance
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.
from the sounds of it,
Chavez is a stellar outfielder defensively, and Gentry could use some work on his routes, iirc
Seems like their bats are very similar and Gentry is a tad faster on the base paths.
That's what I said
I guess the difference is Chavez has already proven himself the epitome of a replacement player already, whereas that’s Gentry’s ceiling.
Morality you can fake. Fun you either have or you don't.
That's not Gentry's ceiling
That’s Gentry’s most likely outcome.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
If not being a replacement type player then
what is his ceiling? I can’t see it being much more.
The bloggerformelyknownasBigBaddBubbaJ
with his speed and defense
if he managed to hit any, he could have some value. If he doesn’t hit at all, his defense and speed would still make him at least a replacement level player and most likely, something like what Chavez has done.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Chavez has been a bit better than replacement level most of his career.
He’s certainly not the epitome. Using UZR as the defensive component, he’s a 1.3 WAR/150 over his career. Last year his season would be prorated to 2.5 over 150 games. He’s been solidly above replacement. The epitome of a replacement player is a little worse than Chavez, who’s pretty damn good (assuming he comes back from injury okay) for a 25th man.
But otherwise, I agree with you. Gentry could be that could, the difference is that Chavez already is that good.
experience
I don’t think the Rangers would be comfortable rolling with Gentry as either the primary or backup, should Borbon go down for an extended period of time.
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
success above AA
and for more than one season….
I think you're wrong.
/Rosenpenis
"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.
heh
well, I think you’re a jerk.
"Drinks are on me if Lewis posts >168IP and an era lower than 3.86." by RangerMad on Jan 20, 2010 12:36 PM PST
Thank you, Lee
"If this video was an ice cream flavor, it'd be pralines and dick." Clark
re: Matthew Wilder-Break My Stride, 4/17/09
Who's Lee?
"Drinks are on me if Lewis posts >168IP and an era lower than 3.86." by RangerMad on Jan 20, 2010 12:36 PM PST
.
"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.
ooooh, sure
We’re having fun here right?
"Drinks are on me if Lewis posts >168IP and an era lower than 3.86." by RangerMad on Jan 20, 2010 12:36 PM PST
I'm terribly confused
This is a Ticket bit right? With Dan McDowell and Lee Corso?
"Drinks are on me if Lewis posts >168IP and an era lower than 3.86." by RangerMad on Jan 20, 2010 12:36 PM PST
Oh...well, if you didn't get the bit
Then you are an ass for calling me a jerk.
"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.
I didn't get it then
"Drinks are on me if Lewis posts >168IP and an era lower than 3.86." by RangerMad on Jan 20, 2010 12:36 PM PST
I could have been clearer
We’re having fun here, right no?
by Anonymous New Guy on Feb 16, 2010 2:24 PM CST up reply actions
Really, this is a huge bit
Ever since he was an asshole to Dan 5 or so years ago.
"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.
Here's the difference:
Gentry has 11 Major League games. Chavez has 827 where he’s given you a fairly reliable sample size of what you’ll get from him (defense good enough to make him a roughly average baseball player).
Sardinas has to be top ten
with Garcia that high
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.
Durrett also has an article on some of the position battles going into ST
And also some things that specific players need to do this spring before April 5th comes rolling along.
Elvis has "shook up" Arlington!!
Was thinking when reading Durrett's article
from today that I can’t remember when we’ve been so “set” at every non-pitcher position. There is no real competition at any position except catcher. Even the DH is set. Guess you could consider 1st base somewhat open too if Davis struggles and Smoak smokes, but overall this is the most settled team going into the spring that i can remember. That feels pretty good.
Happy Fat Tuesday
Laissez les bon temps rouler !!!
Abita’s for all.
"Sometimes you just want to sit back and watch somebody throw 100." - Jeff Passan on Neftali Feliz
"Baseball's all that's real" - JB
ugghhh I wish I was in N'Orleans having a beignet at Cafe du Monde
I did not ask you if you have herpes. I said is that a hairpiece?!?
Quit speaking Communist! Commy!
"grilled cheese punches like a bitch" -Gdawg
"i feel like k-rod after a save." -by reagan on Jan 23, 2010, that glorious day Hicks was out of our lives.
AL West front office talent
From Jamey’s email this morning, a Dave Cameron quote:
Endy Chavez to Texas. Another good move for a club that is making a habit of making them. AL West, best run group of teams in baseball.
I agree with that, the division probably has the highest overall average in quality front offices right now.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
Over the AL East?
I don’t think so / Arnett.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 10:20 AM CST up reply actions
AL East
doesn’t count because Boston and NY just moneywhip whoever they want. It’s easy to win Monopoly when you have all the money and all the properties
"calmer than you are dude" Walter (Big Lebowski)
by Arlington Stadium Legend on Feb 16, 2010 10:21 AM CST up reply actions
Theo has a large margin of error with payroll
but he also….
- plucked Ortiz off the waiver wire (which was a major reason they defeated Bambino’s Curse)
- had the stones to trade Hanley for Beckett & Lowell (which game them their 2nd title)
- sold Schilling on coming to Boston
- drafted or helped develop (integrated into the team at the major league level) Youkah, Lester, Pedroia, Buchholz, Papelbon in The Show
- finessed JD Drew into coming to Boston
- made the best out of a bad situation by trading Manny and getting Bay
- had the guts to trade Nomar and did so for the right reasons
- brought in Dave Roberts for a cheap song at trade deadline (that worked out well).
- traded for Victor Martinez
That’s merely the tip of the iceberg with Theo, who I consider to be the best all-around GM in the game because he knows how to trade (especially under the pressure of the deadline in July), sign free agents and draft/develop young talent.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 10:37 AM CST up reply actions
All valid points
but the resources they have allow him to make and consider moves that other clubs just can’t. He has so much more flexibility than any other club except NY. Theo would be a good GM on any club I think, but having a huge amount of money to work with makes him look even better than he really is. It’s like putting Pujols in Coors Field or something.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
What puts him over the top with me
is his ability to bring in quality young players and make trades under pressure plus he’s privy to information from noneother than the Great Bill James.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 10:44 AM CST up reply actions
I agree....
Give Theo a budget to work with, along with not having the Boston mystique that attracts players, and then I think he would be a league average GM.
Wash is an idiot!!
So you think Theo alone
bets the AL West?
and if so, the only way he could is due to the money.
The mariners have gone from a joke b/c of the amount of money they waste every year, to a team that will quickly challenge us as we are starting to overtake the Angels in the division.
"My expectations today are that we're going to be extremely competitive and if we don't win our division, I'll be disappointed." Nolan Ryan
No,
I think Cashman & Freidman along with Theo make the AL East the best group of GMs.
The majority of LSB views JD as elite when he’s simply not (one year above .500 with several terrible trades, a ghastly hire at manager and horrific management of his payroll) and when you wanna compare Reagins, Beane and Jack Z against the top 3 of the AL East, you will fall painfully short.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 10:56 AM CST up reply actions
How is Cashman a good GM??
All he does is show the lastest big time free agent the trophy case and a blank check.
I could be a decent GM of the Yankees.
Wash is an idiot!!
He did acquire
Granderson and Vazquez via trade this year.
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.
Moves he was able to make because of the fact he doesn't have to worry about money
When you take money out of the equation it makes any GMs job easier. Its how you do when you have to worry about money that shows more of how talented you are
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
Cashman has a different set of problems
than somebody who is a GM in a small/medium market but his challenges are daunting (he’s graded as a failure when they don’t win the World Series) but he still needs to make the right trades while also making sure the minor league pipeline stays full.
You simply cannot live on free agency alone and Cashman doesn’t.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 11:32 AM CST up reply actions
His minor league pipeline is far from full
They have Montero and thats about it. they have no eventual replacement for Jeter currently in their system.
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
What are you talking about?
There’s plenty of good players in their farm system…just look around the MLB.
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
by GhettoBear04 on Feb 16, 2010 11:35 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Banuelos is really good and Romine is nice but yeah
after that not much
"I was going to say, 'You’re gay for Elvis.' But then I realized that I, too, am gay for Elvis." ~Adam J. Morris.
by Kinslerhomer on Feb 16, 2010 11:40 AM CST up reply actions
Because of their pipeline of young talent
(or perceived young talent) they were able to trade for Granderson & Vasquez this year and Swisher last year without giving up Hughes or Joba
He’s done that a lot with the Yankees (getting players that help them down the stretch or in the post-season). Traded for Justice in 2000 (got 20 HRs out of him in 78 games) and Aaron Boone in 2003.
Cashman is a very good GM.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 11:50 AM CST up reply actions
And he's able
to trade away any talent he might have b/c he never has to rely on them.
This is a completely merry-go-round argument. Do you believe Cashman could develop talent w/o the cash to cover his mistakes?
A bad GM for the Yanks cant make it to the playoffs every year.
An ok one can make it to the playoffs almost every year.
"My expectations today are that we're going to be extremely competitive and if we don't win our division, I'll be disappointed." Nolan Ryan
The 1980s/ early 90's NY Yankees had a ton of money
and the freedom to spend as much as they wanted but they didn’t go to the playoffs from ’82-94 because they had such poor management skills.
With very few exceptions, the very best teams have to be able to develop their own young talent, make the right trades and sign the right free agents. You have to be able to do all three or your success will not sustained.
The Yankees because this 15 year juggernaut because they drafted and developed Mo, Jeter, Posada, Bernie Williams, Pettitte, Cano, Joba, Hughes, Cabrera etc.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 12:04 PM CST up reply actions
Should read "The Yankees have become this 15 year juggernaut..."
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 12:05 PM CST up reply actions
The yankees
Built a nice Core using the number 1 or 2 payroll in the majors from 1995-1998. They kept it from 1999 through 2010 by outspending everyone, in some cases by up to 80%.
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
really has nothing to do
with whether or not Cashman is a good GM. Cashman doesn’t “trade away any talent he might have.” He trades packages of players that the Yankees don’t think will be “special” for Major League players they think can help — ala the Granderson deal.
To just assume Cashman isn’t a good GM because he has the Yankees payroll is a huge mistake. True that some years they just club everyone over the head with their bag of money, but Cashman still does a great job. Most teams would be happy to have him as a GM.
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 1:51 PM CST up reply actions
That's a nifty little device
That allows you to dismiss any good moves he makes and trumpet his failures. It’s a good Thing no one around here argues like that.
He has to be doing something right to deal with Steinbrenner and keep the Yankee job for 12 years.
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 11:43 AM CST up reply actions
The Beckett trade
Beckett have helped them get their second title, but they spent a lot of time and money trying to find a SS since that trade and have yet to have a good one. I don’t think trading away the best SS in baseball (and one of the top hitters) when they’re 22 is something that a GM should be proud of.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Flags fly forever, Gdawg.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 10:50 AM CST up reply actions
Having Hanley instead of Beckett
doesn’t mean that they don’t still have that WS title.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Correct.
And they get no credit for Lowell’s contributions because they didn’t want him. He was a salary dump and they took him because it was the only way the deal would get done.
They get full credit for taking Lowell as well.
It’s not like they put him on the bench when he came to Boston plus they gave him a 3/36 deal after 2007.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
Giving him playing time they get credit for. . .
. . . but it’s also obvious, so it doesn’t count for much. And, most importantly, has nothing to do with the trade. If the Marlins traded for Hanley then promptly gave him away for a bag of magic beans it would still have been a good trade for the Marlins, they just happened to fuck it up afterwards.
The contract also has nothing to do with the trade.
Well, I'm assuming in this example the Marlins wanted Hanley and then decided they wanted Magic Beans more.
If they didn’t want him then they don’t get credit, either. And either way, they’re not great GMs, which is the point of this.
doesn't mean they do either
and the did win the WS with Beckett leading the way. Coulda/Woulda/Shoulda, but they DID win it with Beckett being Cy Young-ish during the regular season and lights out in the playoffs.
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 2:07 PM CST up reply actions
That's a pretty simplistic way to look at it.
And certainly does not discredit Gdawg’s point. And beyond that, they’d still have Hanley Ramirez, instead having given Julio Lugo all those innings.
and they wouldn't
have Beckett or have had him for 4 years. I’m not discrediting Gdawg’s point — I just think that if the choice is between a young SS that will take 3 years to develop into an MVP type player or a pitcher who is already a TORP (and is just entering his prime) — the choice is easy for me.
Hate to see Hanley go, love to see Beckett come in. They did win with Beckett, and while it’s possible they could have won with Hanley, it isn’t as likely.
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 2:19 PM CST up reply actions
Boston's window of opportunity to win a title
was open before 2006 because they had Big Papi & Manny close to their primes and one of the things they needed to push them over the top was a frontline pitcher like Beckett.
Yes, Hanley is very good to great but they don’t win that 2007 title without Beckett.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
I'm a Dallas Stars fan
who has no problems with that team trading Iginla for Super Joe Nieuwendyk because of Flags Fly Forever reasoning.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
Who pitches Game 5
of the 2007 ALCS and turns around the series?
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
Who provides MVP level performance
at SS now for Boston? That kind of question is useless. If the trade doesn’t happen, then Boston makes some other move instead, and there might not be a “game 5” situation exactly the same as it happened.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
Yup, they probably get a good pitcher from somewhere else.
An average pitcher plus Hanley would have been better than Beckett + Lugo. Lowell is harder to replace, but again, they didn’t want him. Probably Youkilis is at third base and some average first baseman is at first, and the difference is now probably about negligible.
What isn’t negligible is having someone who hasn’t probably yet even hit his prime but is better than Beckett ever was or ever will be.
Who says they get to a game 5?
Who says they need as good a pitcher if they score more runs? Who says they don’t sign a good free agent? Who says the AAA scrub they call up doesn’t luck in to a good season? Who says they don’t win in 2008 instead?
You don’t know if they would or would not have won with Ramirez + other pitcher instead of Beckett at that or any other point until you conjure up your cross-dimensional crystal ball.
What I do know is that they won one title with Beckett
keep winning 95 games / year.
It’s not easy giving up a mega-talent like Hanley but Boston shouldn’t second guess themselves.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
Well, Boston should have little regret
over a thing like that, it’s not like Beckett hasn’t been good. But at the same time they most certainly should not be patting themselves on the back for that trade either.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
I don't think anyone's saying it was an awful trade or that it didn't end up working out.
Just that it’s not something a GM can hang on his mantle.
What if
the Rangers find themselves in the Perfect Storm and decide their real opportunity to win with Kinsler, Josh, Cruz in their primes is now but they need the Beckett-equivalent and it costs them somebody like Profar who goes on to have HOF career.
Let’s say that trade helps get them over the 87 win hump, they average 96 wins for 5 years in a row while making post-season and also bag a title.
Was that trade worth it?
I say yes, regardless if Profar is a HOFer.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
It possibly is worth it
but not if Profar was going to fill an equally large hole on the team just as soon as whoever we were trading for.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Problem with that assumption
is that you just can NOT simplify all that stuff to coming about because of ONE transaction. Philosophically, sure I’m ok with trading some prospects to get a veteran to put you in the playoffs, but you do that pretty damn carefully — and you sure as hell don’t assume that everything that happens because of that over the next 5 years results from that one transaction.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
This has been a good thread today
good discussion.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
Yeah, the fact that nobody
felt compelled to publicly resign from further posting on LSB means it didn’t suck too much today.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
It's worth it- no doubt
You’re Iginla example is right on. How can ‘potential’ championships ever out-weigh ‘real’ championships is beyond me.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Because you don't know that Beckett instead of Ramirez is the reason they won a championship.
It’s not possible for you to know that.
True,
but I do know they in actuality did win a championship w/ Beckett being a big reason.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Yeah, but for the trade to have been definitively good. . .
. . . it has to have been certain they wouldn’t have won a World Series without the trade. And since the team likely would have been about as good, that’s not the case.
Meanwhile, Hanley Ramirez is younger and better than Beckett.
My argument is you have to use
the word ‘likely’.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Really?
You don’t see the difference b/w likely and actual?
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Okay, I skipped breakfast today,
help me out. What am I missing?
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
I don't think you two
are as far apart on this as semantics might seem to indicate.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
The problem with that line of thinking
is that it takes an entire team to win a WS. Stating that the Red Sox won a WS with Beckett being a member of that team doesn’t mean that the trade was good. They might have won the WS without Beckett or Hanley for all we know.
You can though look at what the team’s needs were, how the players have performed since the trade, each player’s contract situation, etc. and come to the very reasonable conclusion that the Red Sox gave up too much just to get Beckett and its far from any kind of guarantee that they don’t win another WS without Beckett.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
To say this was definitively a good trade for the Red Sox you have to say one of these is true.
1) The Red Sox that year could not have possibly finished any worse than WS champs. They were guaranteed with that roster constructed to win and, though the Indians took them to 7 games, the Indians never had a chance.
2) The Red Sox roster as constructed was good enough to win a World Series and just happened to do so. It would not have been as good if the trade had not gone through, and no Red Sox team since would have had a good enough roster, either.
Further, the Red Sox FO did a good job by getting Mike Lowell, even though they would have kicked him out of the trade given the chance.
3) General Managers have so much control over their teams they can even control how well they play in the seven games of an ALCS.
I can't definitely say anything about
sport outcomes.
The Charles Haley trade worked for the Cowboys. I can’t definitely say they wouldn’t have won without him. I can say they definitely did. That’s all that matters to me.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Then we can't judge
a GM by titles? I’m not arguing to argue, I just don’t get it. The trade worked in my view.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
I'd say Epstein
passes both tests, overall and the Beckett deal.
Obviously, the titles count with me in regards to the Beckett deal.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Heh, fuck me.
What’s the debate again, the Beckett trade or Epstein as a GM?
I like both.
I am pissed at the somovabitch for taking a leave and confusing the hell out of me.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Whether or not Theo
pulled the trigger on Beckett trade doesn’t matter to me…he’s still probably the best GM in the game (and he would be without the large payroll).
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
I think it's both.
But it’s mostly drifted to whether or not the GM at the time of the Beckett trade should be lauded for it or not.
It’s a debate I’m very interested in, as you can see. Spent a lot of time in it.
Profar isn't close to the talent Hanley was at that point.
Oh he might be, but not yet.
Anyway, if you can guarantee me they win the World Series with the trade and never win one without the trade, absolutely it’s worth it. You can’t, though, and neither can GMs, so I’ll go back to judging what they can evaluate and control: whether the roster is better or worse.
I would rather have Ramirez than Beckett.
Which is what it boils down to.
As far as 3 years of develpment, Ramirez was a 5.7 WAR player that year after having put up a 4.5 the first year after the trade. The first was better than Beckett’s first year as a Red Sock by a lot and any year he’d had in his career to that point. The second is better than any year of Beckett’s career but 2007. It’s possible, but I find it hard to believe the Red Sox actually knew Beckett was due for a year far outside of his career norm for or since. If they did know, then it was a better trade than I give it credit for. If they didn’t know, which I suspect, then I will continue to call it a bad trade that worked out decently with luck.
Meanwhile, instead of a couple years of Julio Lugo, they would have someone on the verge of becoming the best player in baseball.
umm...what?
Hanley got traded from Boston and immediately put up a 116 OPS+ with 51 SBs to 15 CS. That year, Boston got a 72 OPS+ from their SSs with 5 SBs to 1 CS. They got better defense out of it, but there is still about 3 wins worth of offense that Hanley gives you to make up for that. That was also the year Beckett put up a 5.01 ERA. The following season, Hanley put a 145 OPS+ with 51 SBs to 14 CS. Boston SSs that year put up a 57 OPS+ albeit with 33 SBs to 4 CS. As good as Beckett was that year, the Red Sox could have used a bit more offense from their SS rather than have another good starter in that rotation. I don’t see how you could say that it isn’t as likely they win in 2007 with an MVP caliber bat at SS rather than giving the opponents a free out.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
It's that people are hung up on Beckett's performances in key games.
The thing is, if things are changed, you’re not probably in the same situations where you need the same key performances. You need to look at whether or not the team would be better, because that’s all the GM can control. Not the luck of how the cards fall.
Of note:
I think most Red Sox fans I know, especially the intelligent ones, look at this trade roughly the way I think I do: it was one they’d rather have back, but at least it lucked out. They’re not happy with it and don’t call it a good trade.
Yep
Things ended up fine with a WS title with Beckett playing a role and not bombing like his 2006 might have suggested, but they’ve wasted a lot of money trying to fill that SS hole and have yet to find a solution. Given their wallet size and their great pitching depth, I’m pretty sure Theo would give up Beckett to get Hanley in there instead of Nick Green or Jed Lowrire.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Another interesting way to look at it.
The winner of a 7 game series largely comes down to a lot of luck. Especially when the teams are pretty even, like the Sox and Indians were.
That series is played again, the Sox probably only win around half the time. The only thing you can do is create the strongest team you can to avoid those situations, and I don’t think the Sox are significantly weaker without making that trade. So there’s little reason to doubt they’d just be in the same position, up against a fairly equal opponent. And if luck works out, they win a World Series.
But he's a BIG GAME PITCHER!!!
"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.
Uh oh. So is Lackey.
This year is another BoSox WS. Book it.
"grilled cheese punches like a bitch" -Gdawg
"i feel like k-rod after a save." -by reagan on Jan 23, 2010, that glorious day Hicks was out of our lives.
I don't know
Derek Jeter is extra special clutch, it could come down to grittiness
You hear about the "Electric Arms", they're all the rage.
"If the Rangers have marked improvement in 2010, I'm going to need to give JD credit." Josey Wales, Feb. 10, 2010 11:45 AM CST
would they have
“wasted” more money on a SS or on pitching?
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 3:02 PM CST up reply actions
yes Gdawg
Hanley is a beast. And even with all the suckiness at SS the Sox have rolled out there, they’ve won 1 WS and have been to another LCS. Beckett has been a big part of the reason why.
Sometimes, to get something good you have to give up something good.
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 2:46 PM CST up reply actions
And there's no reason to think the same could not have been true and Hanley wouldn't have been a big part of the reason why.
And then they’d have an even better player. Who’s younger.
lol, exactly
Its not like we’re arguing that Beckett was hurting their WS chances, but having a SS incapable of hitting hurts a lot more than going from a pitcher like Beckett to the next guy in line on their depth charts.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
clearly not
since they actually did win the WS and did make it to another LCS even with suck at SS.
I don’t disagree that BOS has failed to address their SS woes, but it doesn’t take away from the Beckett deal being one that worked out for them.
Theoretically they might have won a WS with Ramirez. Actuality is that they did win one with Beckett leading the way.
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 3:16 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, it worked out.
A trade that works out with luck is not the same as a trade that looks good for a GM.
luck
it’s all luck the way you seem to look at it.
BOS built a championship caliber rotation and then luck and the players decided it.
Is Ramirez more lucky than Beckett?
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 3:22 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, a 7 game series is largely luck.
So if Fausto Carmona pitches a good game and the Indians win in 6, the Red Sox front office was worse?
no
and that’s my point. We diverge simply at judging the Beckett/Ramirez deal.
The Beckett deal was a good deal because they got a TORP entering his prime that they were able to extend and get cost certainty all for a 21/22 yr old SS.
We do know that the team BOS put together in 2007 won the championship, in large part due to Beckett’s performance both during the regular season and the playoffs. So while they didn’t have Hanley at SS the BOS FO was still able to somehow put together a team good enough to win, and luck prevailed on their side enough for it to happen.
We don’t know how things would have worked out with Ramirez staying in BOS, but dealing a 21/22 yr old kid for a TORP is certainly a defensible deal. For all the money that BOS has “wasted” in filling in the SS hole, they would have wasted double in trying to get another pitcher of Beckett’s caliber on the open market. (that was for gdawg).
It was a good deal or BOS, and obviously is a good deal for FLA too.
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 3:43 PM CST up reply actions
Defensible, yes.
But without luck, it wouldn’t have worked out at all. As it is, it’s merely defensible at best.
And that’s been the whole point of this thread: it wasn’t an awful trade or anything, but it’s not something they should hang their hat on.
lol phil
without luck, just about any trade doesn’t work out.
Are suggesting not to trade prospects at all?
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 3:50 PM CST up reply actions
No, there are plenty of trades that work out without heavy influence of luck.
HOW and WHY a trade worked out is what should be judged. Not merely if.
Stopping at “if” as the only question to make judgements is overly simplistic thinking. It leads to players winning MVPs because of RBIs. We should absolutely always be asking how and why to be more critical and intelligent sports fans.
don't disagree with you
on this opionion… but I do disagree with you on your evaluation of HOW and WHY you think this ended up being a bad trade. (heh, in case you didn’t notice)
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 4:40 PM CST up reply actions
Why clearly not?
Hanley to whoever the Red Sox have been throwing out there for the past few years is a clearly a huge downgrade. Going from Beckett to the Red Sox next option, which includes all of FA in the following offseasons, just isn’t that big of a downgrade.
It worked out for them in that they won a WS in 2007, but what about 2006, 2008, or 2009? Since they didn’t win then, can I just say that clearly not having Hanley hurt more than having Beckett helped?
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Way to finally hit this out of the park, Gdawg.
It worked out for them in that they won a WS in 2007, but what about 2006, 2008, or 2009? Since they didn’t win then, can I just say that clearly not having Hanley hurt more than having Beckett helped?
The problem you have is that Boston
won 95, 96 games in 2008-2009 and are you going to say having Ramirez on the team would have guaranteed them titles in either year?
Show your work.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
I don't think Ramirez would have guaranteed them titles.
I do think they probably would have won 95-96 games. I’ll show you my work in a second.
I think they would have
won 95-96 games those years as well with Ramirez and sans Beckett but I know they won a title with Beckett and were/are a serious contender to win more.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
For this we'll use FanGraphs' WAR.
I’d prefer something with more defensive components crossed against eachother, but whatever. The point is all that matters right now, not pinpoint accuracy.
Hanley Ramirez 07-09: 5.7, 7.3, 7.2
Josh Beckett 07-09: 6.5, 5.0, 5.3
Red Sox SS 07-09: .8, 1.4, 1.1
That’s a difference of 1.6, -0.9 and -0.8 wins a year for the Red Sox. The title year is the only year they’re better, and an average pitcher makes up for that.
Now, Lowell went 5.3, 3.2 and 1.2. That 2007 is really hard to make up for, but the Red Sox never wanted it in the first place. It’s very possible, maybe even likely, they’re a worse team without that trade, but we’re judging their front office, not the trade in a vacuum, and the FO didn’t want Lowell, so they don’t get credit for getting him. As far as the parts they did want, it’s a fairly even the title year and getting worse since.
Further, Youkilis at third and an average first baseman reduces even the title year to less than a handful of wins. Not negligible, but also not out of title contention.
What made this trade work for the Sox was three things that were not within their power: 1) a career year for Josh Beckett that I seriously doubt they foresaw, 2) a career year at the exact same time from a player they didn’t want and 3) being on the right side of luck in a 7 game ALCS against a very evenly matched opponent.
Without those all three of those factors, this is a very damaging trade. The Sox would have no title to show for giving up a guy on the verge of being the absolute best in the game. As it is, it worked out, but primarily for three reasons that are not within a GM’s power.
It ended up possibly, even likely, having been better for the Red Sox than things would have been otherwise, but not for any reason a GM gets credit for.
you can't discount Beckett's performance
they traded for the guy. Perhaps they didn’t foresee him being THAT good, but they gave up Hanley Ramirez as the cost to get him. Clearly, they thought he was going to be a good pitcher for them, and he has been. The FO certainly gets credit for making the deal to get him.
The FO could have kept Ramirez and found another pitcher via FA or in another trade (does that one include Lester since we can’t trade Ramirez, and how does that impact the team?) The point is, though, that they traded for a very good pitcher entering his prime.
It isn’t and would not have been a “damaging” trade.
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 4:18 PM CST up reply actions
well
they went to the ALCS in 2008 and lost in 7, so unless Hanley has a leprechaun sitting on his shoulder spreading magic luck dust, or you somehow know how Hanley will perform in the playoffs (crystal ball here since he hasn’t actually done that yet) I don’t see how he can be expected to help more than what is reasonably expected from Beckett. Seems the FO did a pretty good job of building a team capable of winning in 2008. Luck and a TB team that just played better beat them.
Hanley was remarkable in 2006, not like many rookies so unless you just knew that was coming I don’t see how it isn’t reasonable to suggest that Beckett could be expected to have more value at this point in time. Add to that the fact that 2006 was Beckett’s outlier year as far as performance — it certainly was reasonable to expect better from him that year, the Sox just didn’t get it. So you’re mixing in better than expected performance from a rookie with a TORP’s outlier bad year here.
2009 was certainly a problem, but we’re 3 years removed from the deal and I suspect the Sox figured Ramirez would be pretty good by now but that a WS win or 2 would be “worth” giving him up. Certainly they have an issue at SS, but not making the move to shore up the rotation by adding in a TORP entering his prime would have been more costly than trying to find a SS capable enough to let the rest of the BOS team do its thing.
As good as Hanley is, and as much of a problem as BOS has had at SS, it was still the right move to make.
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 4:08 PM CST up reply actions
Um
I don’t see how he can be expected to help more than what is reasonably expected from Beckett.
In those years, neither do I. I don’t think people have made that argument.
I think most people think the team would have been roughly as good over the last three years, with the difference being Hanley Ramirez is now many billions of times more valuable than Josh Beckett. Hell, he was more valuable than Beckett in 2007 if you consider future.
As good as Hanley is, and as much of a problem as BOS has had at SS, it was still the right move to make.
You can only say that definitively if you can definitively state the Red Sox never win at lest one World Series over Hanley Ramirez’s Boston career.
first of all
that’s exactly what gdawg tried to claim. Sorry, I don’t know how to do the cool quote box thing, but his whole point was that 2006, 2008, and 2009 it is a bad trade because they didn’t win the WS. I’m glad to see you and I can agree on how that isn’t the case.
And no, they didn’t need to win the WS in order for the trade to have worked out. They simply needed Beckett to be what he has been. I don’t dispute that Ramirez is far more valuable now, but that isn’t the point. The point is that 4 years ago when the trade was made the idea was to front a rotation with a TORP that was just entering his prime to compliment an offense that already had one of the best hitters ever and one of the best power hitters of his generation. The Sox needed to balance things towards the pitching end, and they did so.
Yes, Hanley Ramirez is a bad ass. And yes, the trade was worth it in an attempt to put together a championship caliber team, which they did.
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 4:26 PM CST up reply actions
ding ding ding
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
And finally you've said something that I think is logically sound, even if I disagree with it:
they didn’t need to win the WS in order for the trade to have worked out. They simply needed Beckett to be what he has been.
and that’s the thing. Ramirez has been better over his career than Beckett has been over the same period of time. He was not that far behind Beckett in 2007, either. Less than an average player away from him.
So for one season, Beckett was a Julio Lugo caliber player better than Ramirez. Is that worth the entire career afterwards?
And remember this whole argument is about how much it reflects the skill of the GM.
The reasons the team was strong enough to win the World Series are thanks the GM, but not the reasons they actually did. The GM has no influence of the luck that goes in to who wins a 7 game series. The Red Sox could just as easily lose one of the four games they won because of the players or managers doing something wrong, and that’s another thing the GM has no control over.
The GM should be judged by the strength of the roster, not the entire results. That roster was strong enough to win a World Series, but not strong enough to be guaranteed a World Series.
If Fausto Carmona doesn’t suck it up in the playoffs, the Red Sox front office is no better or worse. I feel like this is escaping people.
I don't know how you can argue with
what Boston did.
They accurately assessed the major league landscape around them (there were no obvious juggernauts), the team they had and the player(s) that they needed to get them over the top to win a title.
Yeah, it cost them one of the best players in the game but having best player on your team doesn’t necessarily give you the best team.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
I don't know how you can argue:
1) They get credit for the player they would have kicked out of the trade if they could have or 2) Beckett + Lugo is significantly better than Ramirez + average MLB pitcher or 3) that a GM has control over how the players play in game 7.
A big part of the skill in a GM
is to know when to go for it.
The Manny/Ortiz Window was going to be open for 2.5 more years so offense was not going to be a problem but they needed an ace because Schilling was about to go Earnhart into the wall.
They also accurately saw that there were no other obvious juggernauts in the AL at the time because the Yanks were getting very long in the tooth.
They bagged their title in 2007 before they had to trade Manny, before Ortiz’s roids stopped working and before the Yankees signed Tex, CC and Burnett.
Their front office nailed it.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
You're projecting a lot of hindsight
onto all that, as usual.
You’re missing phil’s point, which is that they still could have won the championship while keeping an absolutely awesome player that their GM did not want to trade.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
I don't know if the 2007 Red Sox
could have won the World Series with ARod playing SS (he hit 54 HR that year) but I do know they won it with Beckett as their ace.
One of the big reasons I was so pissed off at the Rangers (specifically Hicks) after 2004 is that there were no obvious juggernauts or dynasties to contend with which is exactly why there have 5 different teams from the AL in the World Series since that year.
Boston’s FO also recognized this plus they knew how once in a lifetime special it was to have hitters like Ortiz & Manny to build your line-up around plus they knew needed an ace to replace Schilling.
It was a genius, ballsy move that paid off with at least one title.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
Josey isn't the only one
projecting hindsight in the discussion
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 4:30 PM CST up reply actions
I agree with the first two paragraphs.
I disagree that the roster would not have been just as good with Ramirez and some other pitcher instead. Again, not giving them any credit for Lowell. We’re not talking about how well the trade worked out, we’re talking about how intelligent the GM was for doing it.
It's certainly an interesting debate...
…I could see us having this debate with Profar in a few years.
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
by GhettoBear04 on Feb 16, 2010 11:24 AM CST up reply actions
That would mean the Rangers
would have won a world series so i very much hope that conversation happens.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 12:01 PM CST up reply actions
The Beckett trade was not a good one (though not horrible).
It also wasn’t Theo. And if I remember correctly, he was pissed about it.
That's right
That was during the whole sabbatical thing he was taking and Boston had co-GMs, right?
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Yes on co-GMs no on the sabbatical
I think the sabbatical was around Dice-K
"You promised me, Eckstein, that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I noticed that during the most trying periods of my life, there have only been one set of prints in the sand. Why, when I have needed you most, have you not been there for me?" David Eckstein replied, "Because my little legs had gotten tired, and you were carrying me." And I looked down and saw that I was still carrying David Eckstein.
Then he grounded out weakly to second.
He resigned after the 2005 season.
He came back the following January.
I don’t remember him being gone during Dice-K days, unless I missed something.
I agree with all points except the Hanley trade
I think Boston would have more championships today with Hanley rather than Beckett & Lowell. Theo is solid, but like t ball said, he gets to GM with a huge payroll.
Your 2009 Snow Monkey Ambassador
Beckett trade
Theo didn’t make the Beckett deal. He was on hiatus at that point and hadn’t been brought back as the gm. Jed Hoyer was th gm for that deal I believe. Theo has been on record here in Boston that he wasn’t on board with that deal.
by JayinBoston on Feb 16, 2010 10:58 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
I stand corrected if true
but the trade for Beckett & Lowell is a big reason they won the 2007 World Series and it takes nothing away from how I feel about Theo.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 11:07 AM CST up reply actions
For once I agree
Theo does the best to capitalize off the advantages that he has in Boston. He mixes solid veterans with talented prospects as well or better than any other GM in baseball. Even with his advantage in budget, he still maintains a good balance in terms of developing young players and acquiring veteran compliments.
"finessed JD Drew into coming to Boston"
I agree with most of your list and your general thesis, but that one’s ridiculous. Realistically, they talked to Drew’s agent (one Scott Boras if I remember correctly) and convinced him to opt out of his contract and sign a new 5 year/$70 million contract. And I think JD Drew was unpopular at the time in LA.
This was no more finesse than the Yankees getting A-Rod to come back after he opted out.
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
by GhettoBear04 on Feb 16, 2010 11:27 AM CST up reply actions
Eric Gagne
Traded Engel Beltre (minors), Kason Gabbard and David Murphy to the Texas Rangers. Received Eric Gagne and cash.
The people of Boston still curse that trade….
also:
Traded David Aardsma to the Seattle Mariners. Received Fabian Williamson (minors).
Getting Paul Byrd last year didn’t really help them that much.
I guess Mark Kotsay for Brian Anderson worked out.
On the other hand, I’m actually a big fan of Theo, and think he’s done a great job reversing the curse. But I have to poke needles at Josey. its a hobby of mine.
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
What exactly did Boston give up
to get Gagne?
Murphy is a 4th OF who was never going to make it in Boston, Gabbard is the poo poo platter of injured & suck while Beltre is a polarizing prospect who can’t take a walk.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 12:30 PM CST up reply actions
ask folks in Boston
how they feel about that trade. Or just reverse your question, what exactly did TX give up? It was a good deal with potential, pretty much what you want in return for a one-year contract with an aging veteran.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
Boston got a bag
of shit in that trade but they didn’t give up much.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 12:47 PM CST up reply actions
Especially
an aging veteran that flamed out right after being traded. It would have been a good trade even JD got nothing back in return.
by Anonymous New Guy on Feb 16, 2010 12:48 PM CST up reply actions
But what did they get?
20 games of 6.75 ERA and a draft pick that they used to pick up Bryan Price, who is an eh minor league starter that they then shipped to Cleveland in the Victor Martinez trade.
This was a case of subtraction by addition. A definite loss for Boston. Murphy gets some at bats in 2008 definitely, and out hits Jacoby Ellsbury (but without the speed and defense, Ellsbury probably still starts. He’d certainly void any need for Rocco Baldelli by Boston.
That’s the opposite of poo pooing a Max Ramirez trade because Rangers had no place for him or the trade of Adrian Gonzalez because the team still had Teixeira.
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
So Gagne was the best guy to spend those chips on
Or what if Cruz hadn’t worked out, you’d still be bitchin about that trade even though the Rangers gave up less than what Boston did to get Gagne, and we got more from Lee than Boston did from Gagne.
"My expectations today are that we're going to be extremely competitive and if we don't win our division, I'll be disappointed." Nolan Ryan
Yankees and Red Sox skew the picture there
Bad moves don’t get noticed because it doesn’t hamstring them money wise and they can just go out and fix that mistake with money. TB has made some questionable decisions the last couple years but are still very good. Toronto and the whole Halladay thing probably drops them. And any team with Peter Angelos in the FO is gonna be toward the bottom of the list
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
Blue Jays and Orioles bring that division way down
and of course, its tough to say how much Cashman and Epstein have to do with their success over their 150 and 200 million dollar payrolls.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Too early to tell
I’d say at this point you have to give the award to the AL East. They have had A) The most success and B) Relatively low turnover
Epstein and Cashman are truly excellent GM’s. Most people will discredit them in these conversations because of their large payrolls. Regardless, they have used the money wisely and gotten the results worth of the large payrolls.
Andrew Friedman isn’t a household name but he has to be considered one of the top GM’s. He has put the Rays on the map as a contender and done it with limited resources in a division of unlimited resources.
McPhail and Anthopolous are the wild cards here. Both have been doing good things (McPhail the Bedard trade, Anthopolous the Halladay trade) and may be righting two ships that were significantly off course. Anthopolous is new but did well to get something out of Halladay. He was in a difficult position.
I do like the AL West as the clear second best division in baseball now with the potential to slide into the #1 spot.
I think I agree
it isn’t obvious to me that LAA is run well at all – they’re obviously lucky, and they have significant deeper pockets than the rest of the division. But they don’t inspire confidence with their farm system or how they translate them into solid players. Yeah, they’ve won a lot, but that doesn’t mean they’re particularly smart (see Madrigal, Warner)
And while people love to love the M’s front office, I’m still in wait and see mode. I have to wonder how much of the M’s front office love is due to some of the big stat-gurus are M’s fans, and after literally years in exile, their favorite club has seen the light. But that doesn’t mean that they’re any better at it than other clubs. Yeah, Franklyn Guttierez was a great pickup, and they turned nothing into Cliff Lee, but I’m not entirely sold yet that they can develop an organization from top to bottom.
Go Rice Owls!
NY, Boston, and Tampa
are all well run, but Toronto has sucked recently with the jury still out on Mr. Snuffleupagus, and Baltimore is meh.
Seattle, Oakland, and TX are all well run, and though I don’t like some of the moves LAA has made, you can’t argue much with their recent success. On average, the AL West might just nudge out the East.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
I tried ranking all the GM's
I tried to do a broad, opinion based ranking of all the current GM’s but didn’t get very far. You have some guys that are obviously top 5 and some that are obviously bottom 5. But everything in between is murky even when it is based solely on a person’s opinion.
It is hard
Every team has different circumstances, it’s not exactly a level playing field. I don’t put all the fault on the Polish generals for not defeating Hitler’s Wehrmacht.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
My GM rankings (American League)
1) Theo
2) Cashman
3) Beane (about to trade places with that bald motherfucker in Seattle)
4) Williams
5) Friedman
6) Reagins
7) Jack Z
8) Minnesota GM
9) Dombrowski
10) Shapiro
11) MacPhail
12) JD
13) Toronto GM
14) Mohr
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 12:10 PM CST up reply actions
Friedman is an up n' comer
but I need another 90-95 win season.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 12:24 PM CST up reply actions
JD could take a step forward
with a 92+ win season as well.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 12:28 PM CST up reply actions
So 89 wins doesnt do it for you?
I figure after the way he’s crapped away the talent he’s had from ’06-08 that 89 wins ought to be impossible for him….
"My expectations today are that we're going to be extremely competitive and if we don't win our division, I'll be disappointed." Nolan Ryan
If the Rangers win 89 games
this year, they’ve basically stood in place without building on what happened in 2009.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 12:54 PM CST up reply actions
If the Rangers win 89 games
and win the World Series (which could happen)
They’ll tear down the Vandegriff statue and put up a Jon Daniels one instead. (ok, maybe not, but you get the picture).
Its not how many games the Rangers win, its all about having more wins than any other AL West team.
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
Well thats not bad
for a JD offseason dont you think?
So IF Lewis is able to throw Millwood’s innings, Harden doesnt get hurt, and Vlad show some of what he’s got….
How many wins?
"My expectations today are that we're going to be extremely competitive and if we don't win our division, I'll be disappointed." Nolan Ryan
Nothing official from me
until I see This Thing in spring training and read a lot more about what unbiased sources have to say about them.
I will say that going in, I’m not counting on more than a 140 IPs from Harden nor Cobra Lewis to do Jack S this year but I’m comfortable, for now, saying the 2010 Rangers will between 85-89 games.
Official prediction to come before the season begins.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
Too simplistic
the win total itself doesn’t mean much without context unless it drops to 79 wins or goes up to 99.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
Nothing is too simplistic for josey
"My expectations today are that we're going to be extremely competitive and if we don't win our division, I'll be disappointed." Nolan Ryan
And JD should not get a pass this year
if Josh or Vlad miss a lot of time or if Harden can’t go 100 innings.
JD acquired those players knowing their history of injury.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
You can do that with any GM
The Great Theo “finessed” Drew away with 5 years $70 MM knowing his injury history. Or how about Theo and Smoltz last year? How’d that work out?
"You promised me, Eckstein, that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I noticed that during the most trying periods of my life, there have only been one set of prints in the sand. Why, when I have needed you most, have you not been there for me?" David Eckstein replied, "Because my little legs had gotten tired, and you were carrying me." And I looked down and saw that I was still carrying David Eckstein.
Then he grounded out weakly to second.
I emailed Friedman
and told him you need another 90+ win season from him. He said he is making it his top priority because he wants nothing more than to jump in the World Famous Josey Wales GM Rankings…
"calmer than you are dude" Walter (Big Lebowski)
by Arlington Stadium Legend on Feb 16, 2010 12:32 PM CST up reply actions
Hmmm, mine
Theo
Friedman
(gap)
Beane
Cashman
Zoorent
(gap)
Reagins
Daniels
Smith
Shapiro
Dombrowski
(gap)
Williams
Anthopolous (we know almost nothing about this guy, though)
MacPhail
Moore
Very hard to rank, and I group them into tiers as above. Every team has such different circumstances, a different management structure, payroll, etc.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
I think you almost have to do this categorically
such as: Best at making trades, best at drafting, best bang for your buck guys (GMs who consistently make astute, cheap signings), best FA allocator so to speak, etc
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 12:48 PM CST up reply actions
And I'll add that my original comment above
was about the entire front office, not just the GM. Daniels has his strengths and weaknesses, but I’d put the overall Rangers front office up against almost any in baseball right now.
My “front office” rankings would be slightly different than the GM rankings above, taking drafting, scouting, medical staffs, etc. into consideration. Dr. Z in Seattle seems to be awesome thus far, but he’ll have to do some deck chair rearranging I think before his entire front office clearly betters Daniels’ underlings.
One of the reasons I like Daniels is the restructuring of the scouting departments, rebirth of the international area, and the drafting. This stuff will shape the organization for a long, long time, just as the Grieve-Alderson era shaped the 90s. We can argue about stuff like Danks-McCarthy all day long, but it’s really only a small part of the picture.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
My GM rankings
1. JD
2. JD
3. JD
4. JD
5. JD
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Because he spits hot fire
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 4:06 PM CST up reply actions
I meant to say this earlier
And then forgot.
by Adam J. Morris on Feb 16, 2010 7:05 PM CST up reply actions
Epstein, Friedman, Smith
AL
1) Epstein-consistently successful and balanced organization in Boston.
2) Friedman-built a solid Ray’s team with very limited funds.
3) Smith-don’t know much about the Twin’s GM so I probably overrated him.
4) Cashman-top 5 GM, has the cash but also has the pressure that comes with it.
5) Daniels-building solid pitching depth in Texas might be the toughest gig in MLB.
6) Zduriencik-made some great moves for a talent poor organization but did have a young, legitimate ace to build around.
7) Beane-player development and low budget moves are his forte.
8) Reagins-rankings 5-8 are pretty well tied, he could be number 3 or 4 easily.
9) Dombrowski-consistency has been an issue for Detroit.
10) Shapiro-rebuilding Cleveland
11) McPhail-solid for Baltimore so far.
12) Williams-been good and bad at Chicago
13) Moore-Kansas City isn’t easy on GM’s
14) Anthopolous-not a whole lot of information on him as of yet.
When rating Dayton Moore you should have at least added "doesn't understand defensive statistics"
"Dying ain't hard. It’s living in the wake of a thorough public humiliation that’s hard.--JDT217
Internet greatness http://www.lonestarball.com/2009/11/10/1125340/will-carroll-calls-out-josey-wales
Absolutely.
And at first blush, the only division particularly close I would think is the AL East. And now that I think about it, even that’s not really close. I’d think all four AL West GMs would be in the first 10 GMs I’d pick to run my team. Hell, the Mariners, Rangers and A’s probably have three of the first five.
Actually I take that back. It's closish.
Considering I think the AL East has the two best run teams in baseball.
How in your right mind
can you put JD in the top 5?
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 12:17 PM CST up reply actions
Jose can you see,
"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.
Depth is good but...
Could you imagine our catching situation if Salty is injured and it were Teagarden/Molina active. Not a lot of hope offensively out of that pair.
I will throw an offensive black hole in the lineup if he is above average with the mitt,
and can handle a pitching staff. It would be nice if the player can hit, but he must be a catcher first. I think this is really the only place I see eye to eye with Wash.
Your 2009 Snow Monkey Ambassador
I'm pretty sure my 60 y/o Dad, with plates and screws and his back, could wOBA higher than Jose Molina.
Jose Molina makes Taylor Teagarden look like Mike Piazza.
Morality you can fake. Fun you either have or you don't.
I agree with this assessment.
Jose Molina makes Taylor Teagarden look like Mike Piazza.
Offensively and defensively. Piazza was never an “artist” behind the plate. The Flying Molina bros. can all catch.
Your 2009 Snow Monkey Ambassador
And none of them can hit
Especially Jose. Seriously, Kevin Richardson could probably give you what Jose would offensively, and I really don’t think Jose’s defensive edge makes up for the fact that he basically hits like the pitchers he catches.
If anyone thinks Teagarden’s bat makes him unplayable as an every-day catcher, they should be conteplating poking their eyes out at the thought of watching Jose Molina hit.
I know I am.
Morality you can fake. Fun you either have or you don't.
So who's a better option at this point?
A young catcher who can’t hit? Or and old catcher that can’t hit?
"Drinks are on me if Lewis posts >168IP and an era lower than 3.86." by RangerMad on Jan 20, 2010 12:36 PM PST
Young catcher is cheaper
nuff said
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
Yup, plus he has a bit more potential to surprise you than the old fart with the .269 career wOBA
Morality you can fake. Fun you either have or you don't.
If anyone lives near Bako...
@BakoBlaze The Blaze are looking for Game Day applicants for the 2010 season!!!
"I was going to say, 'You’re gay for Elvis.' But then I realized that I, too, am gay for Elvis." ~Adam J. Morris.
Derek Holland is listed as...
..one of the players that Dave Cameron thinks will do better than the projections systems and stat-knowledgeable fans do. He makes a point I was trying to make yesterday, that after Harden, Holland is the pitcher most likely to put up ace-like numbers. Obviously, the chances are lower, but the ceiling is there…which I don’t think you can say about any of the other 6-7 guys in line for a rotation spot. via FanGraphs
In an organization with a lot of good young arms, in a division with a lot of good young arms, Holland gets overlooked, but he may be the single most important player in the AL West in 2010. If he’s as good as I think he is, Texas has a legitimate shot at winning 90 games. This kid can really pitch.
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
The way so many people have jumped off the Holland bandwagon is astounding to me.
And near as I can tell, it’s purely because of ERA.
It always is
Remember the DFA Feldman campaign two years ago? All kinds of short term, surfacy thinking among most fans.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
It's just astounding to me.
He had some amazing peripherals for a rookie, it’s not like he was a nobody as a prospect and it’s not like you can’t see the tools that get him those peripherals.
I’m stoked as hell about Holland, and the fact that there are people here who want the likes of Brandon McCarthy (even if he had options) or CJ Wilson in the rotation more than him boggles my mind.
This is from a Holland article at Fangraphs last September
For comparison, Holland is the 20th rookie pitcher in baseball history to throw at least 120 innings and post a BB/9 below 3.5 and a K/9 above 7.0. Of the 20 pitchers, only three others besides Holland have posted a below average ERA during that rookie season – John Danks in 2007, James Shields in 2006, and Roger Clemens in 1984.
and from a Rotographs article in January:
Overall, Holland’s Expected Fielding Independent ERA (xFIP) was 4.38. The difference between his ERA and xFIP was among the largest in the majors in 2009.
Holland was among the unluckiest pitchers last year, the anti-Millwood. I expect big things out of Holland in 2010, a big step towards being the solid #2 pitcher I think he’ll be for many years.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
by t ball on Feb 16, 2010 12:51 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Unless I don't understand xFIP, it wouldn't, right?
Because xFIP doesn’t have home runs, it just has fly balls.
Yeah
it would improve Holland’s ERA if that rate came back to norms, but not his xFIP.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
The argument for CJ
He wouldn’t necessarily be taking Holland’s place. If anything Holland may be held back until May as his innings are carefully managed, so what’s wrong with giving CJ a shot at starting. If on May 5 or so CJ is your worst starter move him back to the pen and bring up Holland.
Its almost a certainty that a few guys will get hurt or underperform. We truly will need 7 or 8 starters minimum, and the 8th starter drops off a cliff to Harrison and co. At least explore CJ as an option. If not we could be leaving money on the table.
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 12:58 PM CST up reply actions
Harrison as a #8 starter is a pretty good option to have
I’m not a huge Harrison fan, but you could do worse as a #8 starter. I don’t think you can reasonably argue that we need to move Wilson to the rotation because of a lack of depth at SP. Hell, I’m not even sure that Wilson has the arsenal to outperform Harrison as a starter.
This CJ Wilson debate has gotten stupid. The best argument in favor of moving Wilson to the rotation is: “it couldn’t hurt, could it?” The answer is yes, yes it could.
Is 10.3 k per 9 not a good enough reason?
Or have you decided he is incapable of approaching that as a starter?
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 1:18 PM CST up reply actions
You prefer Matt Harrison and Brandon McCarthy's track records to CJ?
Which parts?
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 1:28 PM CST up reply actions
The part where they weren't a little bit better than replacement-level relievers for most of their careers.
Harrison has been about as good as a starter his two years as Wilson was as a reliever for most of his career. One season isn’t going to make me assume he’ll suddenly be the better starter.
Also the part where McCarthy’s problem is staying healthy.
I'd be all for putting CJ in the rotation
over Brandon McCarthy or Matt Harrison.
but, since we also have Harden, Holland, Feldman, Hunter, and Lewis, I just don’t see the need.
Maybe if CJ wants to be the Ace of the Oklahoma RedHawks staff…. but I would prefer to have him as a setup man, lefty killer, and backup closer
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
simply
I’m not sold on McCarthy’s ability to hold up for a full season. Ok, “not sold” isn’t strong enough. McCarthy’s over/under on innings pitched is 100. at best.
If it was an option of pitcher a is in the rotation and pitcher b is in the minors (with no bullpen job available) I’ll put CJ in the rotation and send McCarthy to the minors because I feel more confident that CJ will hold up.
Given that we already have a bullpen job for CJ, I’ll leave McCarthy as the number 6 starter and go from there.
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
Okay, I'm not sold on him holding up for a whole season, either.
But isn’t this about who’s going to be a better pitcher while he is holding up?
Also, remember McCarthy has no options left.
moot
I think this is a moot point because due to the fact that CJ has the left handed setup job locked up, beating out the number 6 starter isn’t going to get him out of the bullpen. To make the rotation he’s going to have to out-pitch Tommy Hunter and Derek Holland in spring training.
Personally, I think we might see a deal late in spring training to put McCarthy on a team which needs a number 4 starter (like Seattle, but not Seattle.)
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
I wouldn't mind it.
I’d rather have Holland in the rotation than McCarthy.
And, for the record, Tommy Hunter.
Wait, really?
Why have people been telling me otherwise?
So, and this isn’t my area of expertise, we don’t have to start him in the Majors?
I think its that he has to clear waivers
has people treating him as a keep him or release him type player.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Yeah he has to clear revocable waivers
But even though its an unwritted rule about claiming guys on those he has enough talent I could see a team put in a claim and force us to either pull him back or let him go for nothing
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
I think we would
But doing that means he can’t go back on revocable waivers for a certain amount of time. So what happens if he starts out the year bad and we want to send him down? Either we have to keep him up or cut him.
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
You can't put him on waivers again for a certain period of time if you pull him off of revocable waivers
And I don’t want to lose the guy over something like that so we can start Holland in the rotation when he wouldn’t be hurt by a little more AAA time
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
Well
Texas would be required to push him through optional waivers to send him to OKC, but it’s my understanding that players are never claimed on these types of waivers. Sort of a “you don’t claim ours and we won’t claim yours”-type arrangement.
by Joey Matschulat on Feb 16, 2010 3:59 PM CST up reply actions
That's what I've always seen
and McCarthy isn’t going to show up to ST looking so amazing that a team will break that unwritten rule to pick him up.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Good to know
For when I’m livid that he makes the rotation over Holland.
Morality you can fake. Fun you either have or you don't.
Haha
I thought he was born of the loins of Kenny Rogers?! What other reason would you need, sheesh.
"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.
The debate has gotten stupid
Because I haven’t heard a decent argument against moving CJ to the rotation? When we ask why not we are asking for some rebuttal but all you say is “what’s the point? We’ve only got him on his current contract for two more years” and “I don’t think it will work” and “He’s blocking people”. Like Tommy Hunter is some huge prospect that shouldn’t be blocked.
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 1:27 PM CST up reply actions
Wait...
..you really think CJ could K 10+ guys per 9 as a starter? That’s ridiculous. He probably won’t do that as a reliever this year.
I think that CJ Wilson can be a decent No. 4, maybe even a No. 3 for this team this year. I have no idea how many innings he could do it for (and I’m not sure anyone else does either). After Harden-Feldman-Holland?, there are more than enough guys who can do the same job as CJ the starter, but not CJ the reliever/closer. I count at least 4 with Lewis, Hunter, McCarthy, and Harrison. So what is the point in adding in a 4th or 5th guy for one of two, maybe 3 starting spots? That’s inefficient use of resources, especially considering you’d be weakening another important area of the team.
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
by GhettoBear04 on Feb 16, 2010 1:32 PM CST up reply actions
C.J. Wilson's career WARs (as a reliever) at FanGraphs
.2, 1.0, -0.4, 2.0
Yup, pretty stupid to think someone shouldn’t just be put in the rotation for finally having a solid year in relief.
How about
I had to sit through way too many C.J. Wilson 5 inning 110 pitch starts the first year Frisco was open and I worked for the Roughriders. Any night C.J. started, you knew you weren’t leaving before 11 p.m.
"calmer than you are dude" Walter (Big Lebowski)
by Arlington Stadium Legend on Feb 16, 2010 1:43 PM CST up reply actions
I'll accept this answer
I just think we need as many starters as we can get and we won’t stretch CJ out in midseason so he’s have to take his shot at the beginning. I’ll concede that I can’t see him eating a whole lot of innings.
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 1:47 PM CST up reply actions
Even with leaving CJ in the bullpen there's about
10 starter options. I don’t see the need to weaken the bullpen when there are other options already available.
"He will not coddle them. Nolan Ryan doesn’t coddle." - Jeff Passan
by Dirk Diggler on Feb 16, 2010 1:56 PM CST up reply actions
What do you have to lose?
Why not? How could it hurt? Who knows, might as well try, he can throw a gyroball.
Do you have anything else to add?
Or are you content to just mock?
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 2:05 PM CST up reply actions
Who?
Harden(durability questions)
Feldman
Lewis(questions)
Holland(Do we really want him to pitch 200 innings?)
McCarthy(goes without saying)
Hunter
Harrison(better than CJ?)
Moscoso()
Nippert(??)
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 2:01 PM CST up reply actions
That's 9 and CJ is better than 4 or 5 of them at least
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 2:02 PM CST up reply actions
I feel like this is becoming a bit, but I'll try anyway.
Yeah, Harden has durability questions. He should still be ahead of Ceej until he’s hurt.
Lewis was brought in because the Rangers buy the Japan numbers, which suggest a good starter in the majors. I’d wager a dominant K/BB ration like that indicates a good starter more than one season as a very good reliever after mediocrity-to-suckitude indicates such.
200 in a player’s second year after 140 isn’t that big a deal. I’d prefer he stay a bit short of it, but there are plenty of ways around that, and putting CJ Wilson ahead of him on the depth chart isn’t the only one.
McCarthy, I would think it goes without saying, has proven he can be a solid starter when healthy. C.J. Wilson finally had a solid year as a reliever after several previous attempts at the feet. I’ll go with McCarthy at least until he’s hurt.
Yeah, Harrison’s two years in the majors have been roughly as valuable, if not better (at times significantly better), as most of C.J. Wilson’s years in the majors. That’s with Harrison starting and Wilson as a reliever. Give me Harrison until proven otherwise.
I’ll probably give you the last two.
I see reason to think Wilson might be better than a couple of them. I see no reason, unless you like his necklaces and the fact that he use to post here, to expect him to be better than any of the first eight, and the only reason to put him higher on the depth chart is because you expect it, not because you think it’s possible.
Well that's exactly where we disagree.
You don’t think CJ is as good as I do, that’s fine. I’d say his 2007 year qualifies as “decent” though. It’s doesn’t make much sense to compare WAR between a starter and reliever as my understanding is that its a counting stat measuring value, so of course a starter would compile a higher WAR in more innings pitched, but maybe I’m wrong on that.
What is wrong with and what is a bit about wanting as many good starting pitchers as possible?
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 2:20 PM CST up reply actions
Yes, it does make sense to compare them.
Because the replacement level is different, they are designed to be comparable. A replacement-level reliever is MUCH closer to average than a replacement-level pitcher. Because pitchers tend to do much better as relievers.
Ah, thanks for the clarification
Makes sense now. I didn’t think you were that dumb to accidentally misuse stats, but I thought you may have been trying to confuse me.
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 2:30 PM CST up reply actions
Well played
"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.
As much as I agree with you on the general premise...
…CJ’s 2009 was a great year from a reliever not a good one.
And to add to your point, CJ would have to give you something like 175 IP with a 4.6 FIP to match his WAR from last year in the bullpen. You can obviously tinker with performance and IP to some degree, but I think it’s a good bet to say he’s more valuable in the bullpen than the starting rotation.
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
by GhettoBear04 on Feb 16, 2010 5:37 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Great is subjective.
By xFIP, his total production was 19.9 runs above an average pitcher (which is just slightly better than a replacement-level relieer), which was 8th among relievers. He was a tad worse by tRA RAR with 10.9 runs, good for 25th. That was partly thanks to a large number of innings, as he was not as good by rate (25th in xFIP, 32nd in tRA).
Those are good. Because there’s no hard and fast definition of great, I can’t tell you it wasn’t great without it becoming semantics, but I refuse to call that great. Even after you take out the Tigers game.
But yeah, that’s semantics. Thanks for the work done in the second paragraph.
Why the hate on Tommy Hunter?
He’s a big, strong, 23 year old pitcher who didn’t suck last year (and led the starters with 2.7 BB/9. He throws strikes and he keeps the ball in the yard and he takes the ball every 5th day. What more do you want? especially in front of this defense.
quick: name the top 5 pitcher in the Rangers organization by innings pitched.
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
entire organization? or just majors?
And are we talking about guys who aren’t here anymore or only guys who are still in the organization?
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
2009 Major and minor leagues for the Texas Rangers.
answer:
1) Millwood
2) Feldman
3) Hunter
4) Richard Bleier
5) Blake Beavan
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
Why would you need to manage his innings?
He had 150.2 IP in 08 and another 142.1 IP last season. He may be pitch a start or two more than you’d like when the season’s over, but he doesn’t need to be handled that carefully.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Because he's 23
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 1:19 PM CST up reply actions
So?
He’s been out of high school for a good few years now and has built up the arm strength to go 150 without showing signs of fatigue. The play it safe rule of thumb is that you can increase a pitcher’s workload by about 30 innings from one season to the next. That puts Holland in the 175-180ish area. So yeah, if Holland pitches well, he might end up with a start or two over that, but there’s no reason to have him miss an entire month+ worth of starts just to try and save his arm from something that isn’t an issue.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Actually, doing that is easy
just have him skipped in the first week of starts when there are many off days.
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
I'm not a fan of managing a pitcher like Holland's inning right out of ST
Let him work his way towards reaching whatever the breaking point is, whether that’s 180 innings, 190, or whatever. If things are going well with him, then you can talk about managing his pitch counts some in August or so. But for as much confidence as I have in Holland, lets wait for him to actually pitch well enough to get to that mark this season.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
well, someone has to be skipped
and since Holland has options, and no waivers, you send him to AAA for a week and let say Mendoza hang in the pen.
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
Didn't the Rangers not skip anyone last season?
Someone might get skipped if the 5th starter is clearly worse than the other starters, but with injury prone guys and inexperienced guys in the rotation, they’ll probably try to make sure no pitcher gets overworked more than is necessary.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Last season
I think that due to the late start because of the WBC, there were many fewer off days in April than in the past. The Rangers had only 4, including the day after opening day. Because of this there was no reason to go with a four man rotation early on as they had done in previous years. They did skip Benson on the third time through, and then replaced him with Feldman for the fourth turn through.
First two turns went: Millwood, Padilla, McCarthy, Benson, Harrison.
Then Millwood, Padilla, McCarthy, Harrison,
then Millwood, Padilla, Feldman, McCarthy, Harrison all the way through to May 20th, (5 times),
then one turn of Millwood, Holland, Feldman, McCarthy, Harrison,
then Hunter replaced Harrison and they went Millwood, Holland, Hunter, Feldman, McCarthy,
then they skipped Holland and put Padilla back in for Hunter and went Millwood, Padilla, Feldman, McCarthy,
then things got jumbled as we had runs through as follows
Millwood, Holland, Padilla, Feldman, Mathis
Millwood, Padilla, Feldman, Holland
Millwood, Harrison, Padilla, Feldman, Holland
Millwood, Harrison, Padilla, Feldman,
Millwood, Holland, Hunter, Padilla, Feldman
Millwood, Hunter, Holland, Feldman
Millwood, Nippert, Padilla, Hunter, Feldman
Millwood, Nippert,
ASB
Padilla,
Feldman, Holland, Millwood, Hunter, Nippert,
Feldman, Holland, Millwood, Hunter, Mathis,
Feldman, Holland, Padilla, Hunter,
Feldman, Nippert, Holland, Padilla, Hunter
After Padilla was banished, the rotation actually settled a bit:
Feldman, Millwood, Holland, Nippert, Hunter, for 5 turns including one McCarthy start in the second game of a double header, then things got “interesting” as we’re now well into september:
Feldman, Millwood, Holland, Hunter, McCarthy (there was a rain-out and a double header in there)
Feldman, Millwood, Holland, Hunter, (with 2 rainouts and a double header)
Feldman, McCarthy, Nippert, Hunter
then finally
Feldman, Holland, Millwood, McCarthy, Hunter, 3 times to
Feldman for the last game of the season.
We blame a lot of things for the Rangers collapse, but rain should also get thrown into the mix. 3 double headers in the first two weeks of September along with some rain-outs certainly didn’t help things…..
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
using the 30% rule
and even using the 142.1 innings from last season — that’s still around 180 innings for Dutch to pitch in 2010. That’s 30 starts at 6 innings per, so yeah, managing his innings shouldn’t be the highest priority — it’s doubtful he sees enough time to threaten 200 innings as it is.
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 4:47 PM CST up reply actions
Good point.
He’s not 20; he’s at the age where he can start to take on a full starter’s role IP-wise.
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
by GhettoBear04 on Feb 16, 2010 1:33 PM CST up reply actions
This all soooo not going to matter
once ST starts and the the injuries begin
"Drinks are on me if Lewis posts >168IP and an era lower than 3.86." by RangerMad on Jan 20, 2010 12:36 PM PST
Who has actually jumped off the Holland bandwagon
I just want to make sure that there is no confusion between someone being fine with him starting in AAA and that person thinking any less of him. Completely different and distinct issues.
by Brett Perryman on Feb 16, 2010 1:20 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, this has little to do with the rotation debates.
Other than expecting CJ Wilson to be a better starter.
Okay
The diminished opinion of Holland by some has apparently slipped past me. I hadn’t realized that was somewhat prevalent.
by Brett Perryman on Feb 16, 2010 1:35 PM CST up reply actions
Exactly
No one’s view of his ceiling has changed. But, miracles of miracles, he doesn’t need to in the bigs at the beginning of the season because there are others who have shown some pretty decent success in the bigs. It wouldn’t suprise me if Holland puts up a very solid MLB season but that doesn’t mean he has to start in the bigs.
"You promised me, Eckstein, that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I noticed that during the most trying periods of my life, there have only been one set of prints in the sand. Why, when I have needed you most, have you not been there for me?" David Eckstein replied, "Because my little legs had gotten tired, and you were carrying me." And I looked down and saw that I was still carrying David Eckstein.
Then he grounded out weakly to second.
Who has said CJ would be a better starter than Holland?
Please point this out to me. Or build another strawman.
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 1:38 PM CST up reply actions
True
Despite all that I posted above, I am fine with Holland spending a little time in AAA this spring. I’m not overly concerned with who is in the rotation in the first couple weeks of the season.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
There have been some...
..that have said they’d rather have BMac over Holland even if their wasn’t the whole option issue. To me (and others), this is crazy. Holland has a much better chance of being a sub-4.0 ERA guy this year than any non-Harden starter this year with the posisble exception of Feldman. He is more likely to be what many people are hoping Feliz will be this year, but with more IP.
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
by GhettoBear04 on Feb 16, 2010 1:36 PM CST up reply actions
Olympic Curling starts today!
USA! USA! USA!
by TooLegitToQuit on Feb 16, 2010 11:49 AM CST via mobile reply actions
They're playing Germany right now on USA.
by TooLegitToQuit on Feb 16, 2010 11:59 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
I am now into curling
After The Simpsons the other day :)
"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.
Tied 3-3 after 4 ends.
Let’s do this.
The Americans had been shooting like shat early in the match.
by TooLegitToQuit on Feb 16, 2010 12:09 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
On that subject, this week's Simpsons episode was a real beating.
Morality you can fake. Fun you either have or you don't.
Callis on Feliz's fastball
response to a question about who of Feliz, Strasburg, and Chapman have the best fastball
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/ask-ba/2010/269522.html
“Strasburg can throw an 8 fastball forever, he’s very unique,” one AL club official said. “Feliz has the best strikeout fastball. Chapman doesn’t throw as many 8 fastballs as the other guys, but has good angle and deception when he does.”
Go Rice Owls!
What is an 8 fastball?
Think that’s the first I’ve seen that, unless it’s some shorthand for 80.
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Feb 16, 2010 3:10 PM CST up reply actions
gotta be s/h for 80 I"d think.
"Sometimes you just want to sit back and watch somebody throw 100." - Jeff Passan on Neftali Feliz
"Baseball's all that's real" - JB
We should call Neftali's fastball the Magic 8-Ball
Shadazz. She's sensitive. Just like jazz. SHADAZZ.
by Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge on Feb 16, 2010 3:18 PM CST up reply actions
funny
but he doesn’t say anything about Neftali Perez’s fastball. Weird considering all the worriment over trading him that comes from TR’s mail bag…
by elvis1isking on Feb 16, 2010 3:19 PM CST up reply actions
OT: So i was wondering
around on baseball-reference and happened upon Joe Torre’s page. How is Joe Torre not a HOFer? My dad always trumpets his cause but serisouly his numbers are very good. Anyone who has seen him play think he shouldnt be in?
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
wandering*
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 12:19 PM CST up reply actions
Joe Torre
A really good player but probably not HOF worthy. Probably hurt by the fact that he didn’t play on any special teams and his numbers were depressed by the 1960s rules.
He’ll eventually get there as a manager.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 12:27 PM CST up reply actions
I consider Joe Torre one of the best players not in the Hall of Fame.
And he’s not in because the voters have absolutely no concept of the changing value of offense by position. That’s why there are so many first basemen and corner outfielders, and the list of snubs includes so many middle infielders and third basemen.
Combining the points in the previous 2 posts
makes Santo my choice as most deserving. Throw in stellar defense.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Yeah, Santo was kind of the overwhelming choice as the best in most intelligent baseball circles.
Now he has serious competition from my choice: Tim Raines. Of course, the difference is Raines is still eligible for the primary ballot.
Bill Dahlen is also up there with those two. The thing is, I can understand most Hall of Fame omissions. That doesn’t make a lot of them stupid, but at least you can understand what that (failed) logic behind the stupidity is. For instance, people comp Raines to Henderson, and decide that, since Raines wasn’t as good, he doesn’t belong. Further, he wasn’t that great by the traditional numbers they love so much and he had drug issues.
Santo. . . I really, really cannot understand how he’s not in. I just can’t formulate some sort of flawed logic that tells me Ron Santo doesn’t belong in the Hall of Fame.
BTW, I suspect Bagwell is about to take the crown for best player not in the Hall of Fame.
For at least a year or two.
You dont think he will be a first ballot guy?
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 12:43 PM CST up reply actions
Borderline at any pt
or borderline first ballot? I can see an argument for not putting him in on the first ballot but he should definitely be in the Hall.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 1:00 PM CST up reply actions
WOW
i definitely agree with psychotic ha. I cant imagine him not getting in.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 1:08 PM CST up reply actions
Stupid writers.
Bagwell is borderline only in the stance that he’s not quite as good as Lou Gehrig.
A HOF without Bagwell needs to get rid of a LOT of people…..
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
I would say a Hall of Fame without Bagwell only has ~40 players.
I could go as high as 40 or a few more if you convinced me to put in players who fall short of that bar but reach significant milestones (like Lou Brock with the steals record) or have a huge impact on the game beyond performance.
Lou Brock
doesn’t belong in the HOF as it stands…..
ditto for Hack Wilson.
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
Agreed.
With a caveat: I can understand the logic of enshrining someone based purely on having a high-profile record. I wouldn’t but I’m fine with it. That’s Brock’s only case, though.
Santo was really good and so was Bagwell.
Darrell Evans was a heckuva player who is not in the HOF.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
by Josey Wales on Feb 16, 2010 12:46 PM CST up reply actions
The biggest omission
I can see right now is Fred McGriff (i fear he will not get in). I mean if he would have had 7 more HRs does that mean he is automatically in? Top 4 in HRs 7 times, OPS+ of 134, top 10 in MVP voting 5 straight times and 6 times overall.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 12:51 PM CST up reply actions
Really? McGriff?
More than Santo, Dahlen, Trammell, Whitaker, Raines, Alomar, McGwire, Blyleven,. Larkin, Grich, Martinez, Torre, Simmons, Allen and probably a dozen other guys I could mention?
I find that hard to believe.
I should have said that a bit differently
An omission that flies under the radar. A lot of ppl have campaigned for Blyleven, Trammell, Raines, etc but McGriff has kind of flown under the radar IMO. I guess it is market but why were people wanting Mattingly in and not McGriff? I think McGriff should be a HOFer.
You are right with most of those names. I guess the bigger argument is where there is a line of demarcation? Like you say below, there really shouldnt be “magic” numbers.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 1:06 PM CST up reply actions
Well, I would say the reason I don't talk about McGriff is because I don't consider him a Hall of Famer.
Worth having a discussion about. Not someone I would have an issue with getting in, he’d just never get my vote.
Thats a fair enough
point. I am that with Lou Whitaker. I do think Martinez should be in for sure. Im a bit on the fence with Trammell.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 1:15 PM CST up reply actions
I'm astounded by having Whitaker behind McGriff.
Fairly similar careers in length, and McGriff’s career OPS+ was just 18 points higher than Whitaker’s. Of course, that’s between a pretty standard first baseman and a terrific fielding second baseman.
I think you see where this is going if you get more in depth.
where?
to me arguing my pt and you arguing yours yet neither of our opinions are changed? If that is what you mean then yes i know where this is gonig.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 1:34 PM CST up reply actions
I think it puts them about on equal footing
then it becomes a matter of opinion. I was not astounded by you saying you are rather indifferent on McGriff getting in. Im the same way about Whitaker.
Saying you are “astounded” when seem to suggest that there is quite a wide gap between whitaker and mcgriff
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 1:39 PM CST up reply actions
would seem*
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 1:39 PM CST up reply actions
Because I think there is a wide gap.
I really have trouble understanding how anyone can’t unless they just look at home runs and ignore fielding and position value. You think 20 points of OPS+ is the only difference between an elite fielding second baseman and an average first baseman?
As one example of the gap, Whitaker has a career 69.5 WAR per Rally to McGriff’s 50.5. Certainly that’s belong in a Hall of Fame argument for McGriff, but that’s also a huge difference between them.
Calling them on equal footing to me is roughly like saying Albert Pujols is on equal footing with Ryan Howard.
And i would wager
you are not all that interested at all to hear why I think they are about on equal footing.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 1:49 PM CST up reply actions
Since baseball has different "eras"
more so than any sport IMO I believe the best way to determine a HOFer is to compare them to their peers. I like to judge how they were for a 5 to 10 yr span (dominance) and then add longevitiy to the equation. For a 7 yr period McGriff was perhaps the most dominant power hitter in the sport. He finished top 10 (subjective i know) in MVP voting 6 times, he was top 5 in OPS all 7 years in his respective league. He was top five in HRs. He was top 6 in adjusted OPS all 7 years as well. He was truly a dominant hitter. He wasnt JUST good at HRs. He was top 4 in OBP 4 of those 7 years as well. Yes most to all of his value does lie in hitting and he was only average to a tick above defensively but during that 7 year span he was a dominant hitter. Add to that his post 1994 numbers which were very good as well and I believe that equates to a HOFer. Of the top 10 most similar players to McGriff according to b-r, 4 are in the Hall while another 4 (Thomas, Sheffield, Bagwell, and Thome) will be in within in next 10 years. You could possibly add Delgado but that is up for debate. The question for me is: was McGriff ever a top 3 player at his position for at least 5 years straight. I believe from 1988 to 1994, he was.
Im sure you can regale me better with the case for Whitaker. Like I said, i dont think Whitaker shouldnt be in at all i just would have McGriff a tick above him in line so to speak.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 2:09 PM CST up reply actions
What about the value of positions.
I’m still asking you how you have McGriff close to Whitaker. How it is that you figure 18 points in OPS+ is the only difference between an elite fielding 2B and a medicore 1B.
McGriff’s Hall of Fame argument is a separate issue.
Further, while it’s not the end of the debate, I want to be clear: you do understand WAR is inherrantly comparing a player to his era, right?
Yes,
i do. I am not an idiot. Admittedly, it is bothersome that Whitaker got dismissed so easily from the ballot when Sandberg was a slam dunk. There does seem to be some sort of disconnect there.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 2:19 PM CST up reply actions
I'm not calling you an idiot.
I am calling this an astounding belief, though. I want to know how you figure that’s the difference when so much evidence suggests the average second baseman is a much worse hitter than that.
Whitaker was better than McGriff
when you compare McGriff to other firstbasemen of his era and then Whitaker to other middle infielders of his era.
phil’s point about positions is important because there are some positions (2b, SS, C) where the best players have disadvantages on the standard stats to compare hitters. For some (Ozzie Smith, Ryne Sandberg) people make exceptions, but for others they don’t.
Go Rice Owls!
Yeah, and I don't think Ozzie Smith got in because people looked at his offense and said:
“Well, it sucks, but gee, if we compare it to shortstops in the 80s, it’s actually decent in his prime, that, coupled with his defense, makes him a no brainer!”
I think he only got in because of his status as the greatest fielder and it just happens by luck that people like me think he belongs.
yep
good point re: Smith. He got in because he was a one man highlight reel (helped by playing in a baseball mecca). Being on the intro to “This Week In Baseball” helped, especially during the pre-ESPN dominance days.
The problem with evaluating defense historically is that while some guys defensive value is obvious, others can be equally valuable and be non-obvious.
Go Rice Owls!
note: I'm not saying Smith didn't deserve it
I’m just agreeing that he probably got in for the wrong reasons. Right outcome, wrong logic.
Go Rice Owls!
Happens in sports sometimes.
Like the 1988 NL MVP. Believe it or not, my hindsight choice is Kirk Gibson.
It is not, however, because he was a gritty intense dude who beat up his teammates until they played hard.
No,
it is not.
"JD gets complete blame or credit for what happens in 2010 and I think Nolan wants it that way. JD is paid to be a real GM and needs to start performing like one." - Josey Wales
by Michael Cave on Feb 16, 2010 1:48 PM CST up reply actions
The only way to call Pujols and Howard similar is to just look at home runs.
To ignore several facets of the game.
I think McGriff might be as good as borderline. . .
. . . but I think this is primarily a great example of why there shouldn’t be automatic qualifier numbers.
Argument against Santo
How can a team with 4 HOFers go 59-103?
could you induct a 5th HOFer from that team?
1966 Cubs had Ernie Banks, Billy Williams, Fergie Jenkins, and Robin Roberts.
Plus Ron Santo.
Not saying he’s not a HOF level player, just making the argument.
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
Well
Roberts was done (and terrible), Jenkins was a rookie long reliever, and Banks was 35 and not very good anymore.
by Adam J. Morris on Feb 16, 2010 1:01 PM CST up reply actions
Hey
There is a reason they lost 103 games….. it wasn’t a fluke.
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
Interestingly...
…they also had a washed-up Curt Simmons, who isn’t quite a HOFer, but was a very good pitcher for quite a while.
by Adam J. Morris on Feb 16, 2010 1:07 PM CST up reply actions
The 1989 and 1990 Dallas Cowboys
had two and three HOFers at QB/RB/WR, Novacek on board, Daryl Johnston and most of their eventual dominant OL in place. How could those teams and specifically those offenses be so awful?
by Brett Perryman on Feb 16, 2010 1:23 PM CST up reply actions
Certainly a lot of it
but I think there are parallels between a rookie/2nd year Aikman, Irvin not at full strength, Johnston not even securing a full time spot initially, and having some good to very good players but huge holes around them, rather than quality players at every position backing up the core.
by Brett Perryman on Feb 16, 2010 1:41 PM CST up reply actions
Mike Shula
Managed to screw up two perfectly good institutions in the Cowboys and the Crimson Tide. How he could be the son of one of the greatest coaches ever and such an utterly incompetent dumbfuck at the same time mystifies me. But he was.
"Jesus, Spanish- our jobs aren't enough, now you want our words?"
-- Sterling Archer
I thought David Shula
was with the Cowboys and Mike Shula was with the Tide, no?
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
Yeah
David Shula got demoted after 1990 from O-coordinator to WR coach or something, then left, which resulted in Don having a grudge against Jimmy from then on out because he felt his little boy was scapegoated.
David Shula is such a brilliant football mind he now runs the Shula restaurant chain.
by Adam J. Morris on Feb 16, 2010 2:43 PM CST up reply actions
That's right
Don has two idiot sons, not just the one. My bad.
"Jesus, Spanish- our jobs aren't enough, now you want our words?"
-- Sterling Archer
because football is not baseball
a) the standards for HOF are different
b) football players develop differently than baseball players.
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
I'd throw in Dominic DiMaggio
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
I don't know.
I’m not willing to give someone that much war credit. It would take a lot for him to meet the threshold to even be in my gray area. He gets a nice “anecdotal support” boost from me, but that doesn’t account for much.
Those were the potential prime years of his career.
Then again, I’m fascinated by Pete Reiser and Dale Alexander- ‘Coulda beens’.
DiMaggio of course, did much more than those two. After reading Halberstam’s ‘The Teammates’ and hearing TWilliams talk about him, I’m sold.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
I agree they were his potential prime.
But they would have had to have been some huge, huge years, and I’m not willing to assume they would have been.
definitely underrated
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
hmmm.
a centerfielder without power, without speed, who walked a lot but didn’t hit for great average during a time when offense wasn’t depressed playing in Fenway? where can I sign him up. (that last part was sarcasm).
I’ll take non-HOFers with an OPS+ of 111 for 200, Alex
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
Well, he's obviously not a HOFer
but I don’t understand why you’re expecting a CFer to be a power guy. He had a .380 OBP and a 111 OPS+. That’s pretty dandy for a CFer. To me he’s underrated in the sense that no one ever even talks about him and he was a pretty good player.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
Also considered the Paul Blair/Garry Maddox of his era
with much better offense.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
I find him to be either underrated or overrated.
Not by you, I don’t think, but in general. Either someone has never heard of him and doesn’t realize he was great, or they take it to what I consider to far an extreme for the story aspect of it.
then we agree
he goes into the Hall of the pretty good.
as far as the Hall of Fame: Chicks dig the long ball. hit for power or GTFO.
there are exceptions: be a great fielder, get on base a ton, have great speed, hit for very high average.
do only one of those things and thank you for playing but not in my HOF. (well, I guess very high average. Rod Carew and Tony Gwynn can come in, but not someone like Al Oliver.) Eddie Yost, thank you for playing, but no.
Oh my god! What can it be? We're all doomed! Who's flying this thing?
-Wash
'but not someone like Al Oliver'
Hey, wait a second…
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
I wouldn't dismiss the walks so easily
with a guy that averaged 121 runs/162 games. Yes, I still like the archaic stats, since the point of sports is to score more than your opponent.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
But surely you understand the people behind you are going to affect how many runs you score, right?
If player A and player B get on base at the same rate, but player A has a AAA team behind him and scores fewer runs, he’s worse because runs are how you win the game?
Shouldn’t the players instead be judged by how many run scoring opportunities they create regardless of how good or bad the teammate’s they happen to play with are? Wouldn’t that likely be more accurate?
No doubt.
And vice versa, hence Williams’ high praise of Dom D.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Because it magnifies his ability.
Not saying others w/ less runs don’t deserve to be looked at, but his are obvious.
Of course fate plays a big part.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Makes it clearer
than a guy you have to search for peripheral stats. Just makes his ability to contribute less clouded. His contribution is obvious.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
I don't see how that's true.
Looking up runs scored is harder than looking up on-base and slugging percentages?
Just a stat I like.
His OBP was impressive as well.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Okay, Scoop, I'm going in to this assuming we're both willing to learn something.
So either you or me or both of us, and what I want to know now is WHY it’s a stat you like.
Maybe it's a generation gap
I do like some of the new numbers, but the simpleton side of me still likes the basic numbers. I still find myself looking at the basic Triple Crown numbers.
Simpleton says scoring runs(Dom D.), and preventing runs(Dom D) is the name of the game.
Believe me, I understand there’s much more to defining a player. And I appreciate the side you look at.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Okay.
But certainly there’s a difference between enjoying a number as neat and thinking it has value as an analytical tool, right?
Sure
But I also think some of the newer stats are paralysis thru analysis.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
I don't see how some of these
help us differentiate how a player’s performance is enhanced(or not) by his teammates. i.e. Dom D benefits from having Williams behind him in VORP or runs scored. And Williams benefits from having Dom D in front of him.
The difference for me is runs are a finite number, whereas VORP, WAR, et al. use arbitrary numbers to create an average.
That being said, I do find the new numbers beneficial as alternative ways at viewing a player. Even something as simple as WHIP is something I wouldn’t have used in the 80s. Now it’s the first stat I look for in a pitcher.
The older stats are far from perfect. What they do is give me a solid view of a guy that gets on base, hits for power, scores…I’m sure the newer ones do as well, as I admittedly don’t follow them as closely.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
VORP isn't an average.
It’s a total sum.
Anyway, they’re less impacted by a player’s teammates because they look at the elements of the game that a player can control as much as possible. The ability to avoid outs isn’t impacted nearly as much as the “ability” to score runs, for example.
But doesn't it take
an arbitrary number like 75-80% average as replacement player?
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
I prefer to just praise
his onbase skill, which was pretty good.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
by t ball on Feb 16, 2010 3:38 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Santo
here is a completely unscientific, non-quantitative take.
Cubs players tend to be overrated. Overrated players are more likely to make the HOF. If Santo isn’t in, and yet was a Cub, he must not deserve it.
Yeah, that is completely flawed. But I won’t lose sleep over a Cub not being in. Good players on other teams get screwed far more often. See Lou Whitaker, who didn’t even get enough votes to stay on the ballot, yet Ryne Sandberg, who was a similar contemporary player, easily got in.
Go Rice Owls!
Yeah, Whitaker got screwed.
I’m not going to factor in what franchise a player played for when evaluating how much they do or do not deserve to get in, though.
well, I agree that franchise shouldn't matter
but given that it obviously does (see Tim Raines vs, say, Jim Rice), I’m going to go ahead and say that it does affect how much I care about a guy getting screwed or not. Maybe that isn’t fair to Ron Santo, but no one is feeling sorry for all the guys who aren’t in Cubs, Red Sox, Cardinals, or Yankees uniforms.
Go Rice Owls!
Well, the reason I care has very little to do with compassion.
It has to do with a longing for things to be correct.
Also, if it did have to do with compassion, my compassion would be directed towards Ron Santo, not Cubs fans, and thus my opinion probably still wouldn’t change.
On the subject of great players not getting in to the Hall of Fame. . .
Talked about it on Facebook, but I wanted to bring it here..
I watched Inglorious Basterds last night. I thought it was slightly overrated. Not a bad film, but nothing extraordinary.
Discuss.
Pulp Fiction was better.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
I sure will...
as soon as I have the patience to sit through the mountains upon mountains of dialogue that film makes you sit through.
I liked Basterds a lot but
give me both Pulp Fiction & Reservoir Dogs over it.
Tarantino does a lof things right. I love his dialogue and use of music.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
"Ranger players, especially veterans, weren’t surprised that Daniels couldn’t find a deal"
"The Influence continues." Josey Wales (1/18/10)
Yeah it wasn't terrible...
Waltz was fantastic. It was just way too much dialogue, and was too predictable.
Tarantino
The Kill Bill films are my favorites- they may not have been the best of his films on a purely artistic level, but they sure were a hell of a lot of fun.
Honestly, though, I’ve liked most of his films- the only one that I didn’t much care for was his chapter of Four Rooms, and that was just a crappy movie all the way around.
"Jesus, Spanish- our jobs aren't enough, now you want our words?"
-- Sterling Archer
I remember when you used to sweat Memento..
actually I think the entire ESPN board was on that train.
That was a terrific movie
While you were pimping “Boondock Saints.”
by Adam J. Morris on Feb 16, 2010 3:14 PM CST up reply actions
Great movie to watch at home
when you can fastforward through about half an hour of it.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Probably more than a half-an-hour...
The entire opening scene + the bar scene have to be at least a full hour of film.
the bar scenes fine for me
The dialogue isn’t quite so pointless at that point and is entertaining. Its when you have to read ridiculous subtitles for 10-15 minutes that I wanted to just skip that scene.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
The bar scene played well in the theatre
It’s refreshing to have some suspense in a scene where you have to wait more than five minutes for something to happen.
I suppose...
I guess I knew where it was headed when I first saw it, so my interest was faded by the time the climax of that scene hit. QT has become a bit predictable.
jesus, what is wrong with you
the dialogue and the tension in those scenes is amazing
Fuck Mike Estabrook
Saw it recently for the first time...
…it wasn’t exactly what I expected. It took pretty much the whole movie for me to get over Brad Pitt’s awful accent, but I do think they captured what makes someone German, French, etc.
I dunno, I watched it after a long week and wanted to have bad guys to root against and watch get killed in creative ways. Sure, Hitler is bad, but he really seemed like more of a pansy politico who was concerned more about what people thought than just inflicting pain. I kind of liked the JewHunter, he was an entertaining character.
So, I guess I wasn’t a fan because of my incorrect assumptions about the movie more than anything.
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
by GhettoBear04 on Feb 16, 2010 1:45 PM CST up reply actions
agreed
It took pretty much the whole movie for me to get over Brad Pitt’s awful accent
You hear about the "Electric Arms", they're all the rage.
"If the Rangers have marked improvement in 2010, I'm going to need to give JD credit." Josey Wales, Feb. 10, 2010 11:45 AM CST
What do you want from a movie?
Beautifully paced storytelling (it’s a 3-hour movie, you know), gorgeously rendered shots, incredible, multilingual acting, and a real feat somehow drawing comedy from pure tragic subject matter (granted the statute of limitations on PC with WWII is over).
I mean… What have you seen lately that’s good (leaving aside whether it was overrated)?
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Feb 16, 2010 3:15 PM CST up reply actions
That was pretty much my thought when I watched it
The way it was advertised I was expecting more of an actual focus on the Basterds, and more of a “Dirty Dozen” type plot, but yeah. It’s okay.
Morality you can fake. Fun you either have or you don't.
So....just got a FB friend request from Ron Spellman.....
………….
………………….
………………………….
"Sometimes you just want to sit back and watch somebody throw 100." - Jeff Passan on Neftali Feliz
"Baseball's all that's real" - JB
Now might be the time to consider witness protecton
Morality you can fake. Fun you either have or you don't.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
