Display posts from previous
Sort by

Who will win the series?

Arizona Diamondbacks
Total votes: 1 (2%)
Boston Redsox
Total votes: 12 (26%)
Chicago Cubs
Total votes: 5 (11%)
Cleveland Indians
Total votes: 8 (17%)
Colorado Rockies
Total votes: 6 (13%)
LA Angels
Total votes: 1 (2%)
NY Yankees
Total votes: 4 (9%)
Philadelphia Phillies
Total votes: 5 (11%)
San Diego Padres
Total votes: 1 (2%)
Who Gives A Flying Fuck?
Total votes: 4 (9%)
Total votes: 47

MLB 2007 Post season thread

461 by alandeus_Archive
Yngwie Einstein wrote:
vockins wrote:It sucks if you're a Sox fan, but not because of anything the Tigers have done.


Kenny Williams isn't worried, why should I be?

Williams remained confident his current roster possesses enough talent to contend.

"All this has done is put the Tigers in a better position to contend with us," Williams said.


And that's just with the current roster; just wait until he signs - yet again - Carl Everett, 2-time All-Star (to get into the spirit of unsubstantial "metrics").

MLB 2007 Post season thread

462 by Yngwie Einstein_Archive
Kenny Williams is an idiot who lucked out in 2005. All other years his moves have totally backfired. He inherited a pretty solid farm system and has made bad draft after bad, which is why the Sox are where they are at, looking up to the Tigers, Indians and Twins. Hell, the Trib even has them rated below KC in the division as the rosters currently stand. It says something when Rowand would rather listen to an offer of a 5-year deal with the Royals than go back to a team just two seasons removed from a championship.
meh

MLB 2007 Post season thread

463 by Hexpane_Archive
MWilke wrote:My position: Hanley Ramirez is the most valuable player to come out of that trade. Look up his stats, they've already been posted above. But for some reason you refuse to recognize them.

My other position: Using post-season stats to prove a point are flimsy premises that don't lead to a conclusion. Post-season stats are not a metric because you cannot measure such small sample sized stats to tell a story of what's going on. You refuse to grasp this. But you also think Joe Morgan's commentary has value. Since you refuse to grasp this, I wish you would come to my card game and use your misled arrogance with your money. "I just won a huge hand with a full house! I'm soooo the best player at the table!"

My additional position: Saying that I just attack your points and don't have my own position is a Karl Rove tactic that defers from the absurdity of your poorly argued points in the first place. I'm ashamed that I'm actually responding to it.

My last position: How the fuck is Hanley Ramirez discredited because he's never been in a fucking World Series in his first two seasons of play, playing on a team with an $18 million payroll?

My ultimate position: World Series MVPs are NOT A FUCKING METRIC to measure a player's worth. David Eckstein was the 06 MVP. If the Twins sign him, I'll stab myself.


Well at least you are finally voicing your own opinion, thanks for that.
I did "look up his stats" on Hanley, OFFENSIVELY he is awesome. Why do you ignore the fact that he is the WORST DEFENSIVE SHORT STOP IN ALL OF MLB BASEBALL?

The worst! Is defensive rating not a metric? He is a + + offensive player, and a - - defensive player.

The other dude mentioned "by any metric" ... by ANY metric. Post season awards is 1 metric, of ANY. I also used regular season stats to back up his post season awards.

And get off the statistically significant bullshit. I use metrics that are used by the MLB, I didn't decide which stats are tracked and how they are tracked, MLB does. Again if you have a problem w/ me bringing up post season stats and this bullshit "small sample size" complain to the MLB not me, I don't make the rules for stat tracking.

This isnt a clinical study for the cure to AIDS, its a fucking baseball analysis. Arguing over which player is 'better' is a subjective discussion. You can not "prove" it one way or the other, you can only have an opinion and back it up w/ stats, scenarios.

Lets use A- Rod as an example. Best regular season stats in the game. Terrible post season stats recently. But they only played 1 series against CLE this year, is that "too small a sample size" its the MLB playoffs, they only have so many teams and games, if you are not going to even consider playoff performance as a measure of greatness, why even have the playoffs? Why does MLB track playoff stats differently than regular season? Why not just lump in playoff stats to regular season stats?
WHY?

Ask the fucking MLB not me.

I didn't say Hanley was "discredited" I simply listed any and all awards they have won recently in the MLB. Hanley won NLROTY, is it wrong to list an award now?

Does clutch not mean anything to you in terms of a player's value in the MLB? Is A-rod a better baseball player than Reggie Jackson to NYY fans?
Why name a guy "Mr. October" if WS stats are "too small a sample size"?

Ignoring playoff performance is a losers mentality.

Sure Hanley hasn't had the chance to perform in the playoffs yet, not his fault. However he HAS clearly demonstrated that he is again the WORST DEFENSIVE PLAYER at his position in the entire league.

I hear all the time on this board about how important defense and pitching are, except when it comes to my opinion that the Beckett/Lowell for Hanley trade is not as lopsided as was first thought when Hanely broke out offensively and Beckett took a shit on 2006.

I don't think its insane to suggest that one of the best pitchers in the AL is equal or even maybe a little better (has more value to a team) than the worst defensive short stop in the game, who is also the best offensive short stop.

its clearly not cut and dry as to which player is better, but I think if you asked most GMs in MLB who they would rather have, 2007 Hanley or 2007 Josh Beckett, they'd take Beckett in a heartbeat because of the premium on pitching and the post season track record.

Ignore post season track records if you wish, GMs do not.

Wow Dodgers just nabbed Andrew Jones for a short term deal, way expensive per season but if he flops after a few years, they still make out ok w/ him coming off the books.

They are suggesting Juan Pierre play LF now? I dunno I like JP's ability to get on base and get around the bases, but as a starting LF in the NL w/ ZERO risk of hitting a HR? I'd almost risk keeping Kemp and Either and dumping JP rather than having a LF w/ no power at all.

Are the LAD now the favs to win the NL?

MLB 2007 Post season thread

465 by MWilke_Archive
1. Your team has Manny Ramirez, David Ortiz, and formerly touted Johnny Damon for years. Obviously the way THEY produce(d) allowed Red Sox fans and front office to ignore their defensive short comings. Hanley out-produced both of them in 07.

2. How do you know that Hanley Ramirez wouldn't have been the MVP of the World Series in 07 had the Red Sox not traded him. You don't know. That's why MVP is a metric, there's too much freaking chance to qualify.

3. Bad GMs don't ignore post-season performance. Good ones like Billy Beane and Theo Epstein do ignore them and know when to sell high off of them. Jeff Weaver got an $8 million a year contract for his post-season performance. How's that working out for Seattle?

MLB 2007 Post season thread

466 by Hexpane_Archive


not sure where this is going but

1. Big Papi doesn't play defense regularly, and when he did he actually had a string of error free games. Damon was very good defensively in 04 as far as fielding (wet noodle arm was a -) Manny while not a + defender, is actually not that bad considering he has an accurate arm and can cover a decent amount of ground/ make up for his mis reads.

In fact Manny has been praised a lot recently as he has learned to "play the wall" in Boston as well as any LF in recent memory.

Even tho none of them were Gold GLovers, none of them were ranked as the WORST at their positions.

Hanley "out produced both of them" who is "both" you listed 3 players, I assume you mean Papi and Manny? Ask any GM in MLB who'd they rather have hitting on their team Papi or Hanley. Not "who would you rather rebuild with" but who would you rather have batting for you in 07...Even in an off year for Papi and Manny, I don't see many GMs picking Hanley over Papi

2. I never said Hanley "couldnt/wouldnt" have been anything. I simply listed awards as facts. Its not about hypotheticals.

3. "Good GMs do ignore post season performance"????? ROFL and you used Theo as an example???? seriously?

2 words - Curt Schilling

Lets look at the Boston pitching staff

Schilling - one of the most impressive post season resumes ever for a pitcher
Beckett - one of the most impressive post season resumes ever for a pitcher
Dice K - one of the most impressive [JPN] post season resumes ever for a pitcher. his MLB post season stats not so much, but they signed him based on his only stats avail, JPN and WBC

How about we go around the bases?

Papi - the most clutch post season hitter in red sox history
Lowell - 2 WS wins, WS MVP
Manny - WS MVP, post season stats are strong,


Obviously post season stats are not the only thing you go on, but good GMs dont "ignore" them, thats absurd to even suggest it.

Why would the sox re-sign a guy who throws 88mph fastballs and is on tap to get maybe 8 wins in the regular season? because he is curt fucking schilling and despite being old, fat and hurt, he can still manage to win
post season starts.

I think the Hanley Ramirez matter can be settled w/ the proverbial "Both teams are satisfied w/ the trade" platitude that GMs usually say after the deal is done.

Would I love to have Hanley instead of Lugo on the red sox? Of course I would as Lugo is no defensive wiz (although he didnt do too bad in the post season, I know the post season "doesnt count" according to you)

But would I rather have Hanley at SS and not have Beckett/Lowell in 2007? No way in hell. Not unless Hanley can throw 7 inning gems in october

Now back to our regularly scheduled "winter meetings/post season/post winter meetings" discussion.

MLB 2007 Post season thread

467 by alandeus_Archive
vockins wrote:The Dodgers will get four to seven wins over the course of a season by having the grounds crew taze Juan Pierre before he can reach the field during every home game.


It'd be the perfect crime if they were able to convince the judge it was self-defense. Too bad for them that everyone knows Pierre can't slug.

MLB 2007 Post season thread

468 by STF_Archive
MWilke wrote:2. How do you know that Hanley Ramirez wouldn't have been the MVP of the World Series in 07 had the Red Sox not traded him. You don't know.


Who cares? They won the World Series. Without him. In a sweep. Would they have been better with H. Ramirez? You can't more win than won. The trade obviously worked for the Sox.

As a Sox fan I feel only the slightest pangs of regret at trading him. That's what good, financially well-off teams do. You trade prospects for proven players. The bad teams with no money get prospects and hope they all get good at the same time and they'll be competitive. Then if these prospects become very good players, when the poor, bad teams can't afford them anymore you sign them in free agency or trade more prospects for them.
Dr. Geek wrote:I once found a soggy dollar floating in a puddle on the side of the street. I carefully picked it out of the water before it sank to the bottom. It smelled funny after it dried.
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests