Baltimore Orioles
Boston Red Sox
New York Yankees
Tampa Bay Rays
Toronto Blue Jays
Chicago White Sox
Cleveland Indians
Detroit Tigers
Kansas City Royals
Minnesota Twins
Houston Astros
LA Angels
Oakland Athleticss
Seattle Mariners
Texas Rangers
Atlanta Braves
Miami Marlins
New York Mets
Philadelphia Phillies
Washington Nationals
Chicago Cubs
Cincinnati Reds
Milwaukee Brewers
Pittsburgh Pirates
St. Louis Cardinals
Arizona Diamondbacks
Colorado Rockies
Los Angeles Dodgers
San Diego Padres
San Francisco GiantsSeriously, Chavez that high is a shame. Makes almost 9 mil a year and he didn't even post a .800 OPSOriginally Posted by Providence A's
well, boo ****ing hoo. And he can't hit lefties for shit.
Seriously, Chavez that high is a shame. Makes almost 9 mil a year and he didn't even post a .800 OPSwell, boo ****ing hoo
.794 is close enough to .800. And not bad for someone without much protection with the injuries the A's had. His career OPS is .846 and he's won 5 Gold Gloves in a row. I'm sure you'd rather have him than the guy you overpaid for last winter. Not many lefties hit lefties well to begin with, but his OBP and average was about the same. The homers and slugging were down a little if you give him the same ABs for vs. left and right.
And I'm sure you'd take Crosby over whoever-the-hell plays SS for the Mariners...Mike Morse is it? Yea...Crosby will have a breakout year this year if he stays healthy...he missed a lot of time last year.
Besides it's just some jackass's opinion anyway (that guy...not me, well I'm a jackass, too, but I mean this other guy on the interweb just like us)
Why does everything become compared to the M's? But I would take Aramis Ramirez over Chavez and I'd take Peralta, Lopez, Young, etc. over Crosby.
I compared them to the M's because that's the team you support. If you liked the Devil Dogs, then I would have compared the players to their players. I'm just trying to defend my team's players; that's all.
And I guess Beltre can't hit right-handers because his numbers vs. righties are much worse than Chavvy's vs. lefties
http://seattle.mariners.mlb.com/NASA...181&statType=1
An OBP below .300 and an OPS below .700
Rodriguez is 30, Dunn is bigger than Ortiz, and Hafner is essentially a DH at this point.
None of those points are valid, Hafner's only thing over Ortiz on those three aspects is his age and he's less than two years younger. Dunn's huge and can't play defense that well either. Ridiculous. At least Dunn's only 26. You can have two of those, but if you have that third, sorry, you can't be a Top 40 value. If there's a GM who wouldn't trade a number of those players for David Ortiz, they are insane and likely haven't faced the Red Sox within the past few years
And I know age matters, but he can't be telling me he believes that the Top 40 value players in the majors are all under 30. Is he trying to say, that if Hendry called up the A's and said "Haren for Derrek Lee, straight up", they wouldn't do it?
Michael Young was the best SS in baseball last year offensively, he's in his late 20's, is he not on there because he's not a prospect? How about Morgan Ensberg?
http://strike3forums.com/forums/phot...pelbon2006.jpg
Then out of fairness to the others you will be Slagathor.
It's not that hard to imagine that a team would turn down a 30 year old 1B making 8 million a year for a 25 year old pitcher who is making near the league minimum? Seems to make sense to me, you can keep the guy who is probably going to produce for 5 years longer and spend the money on a guy who probably won't be as good as Lee, but is good enough.
The Ortiz thing is wrong, but it does have the writers opinon in it. He is very anti-Red Sox and Yankees, but is extremely pro-A's and Angels. It also looks like he takes defense into account a bit to much.
For all the potential that Danny Haren has, unless the A's believe Lee will revert back to his former self, not trading Danny Haren for a player who was the best hitter in baseball last year seems like a blunder. Depends, I happen to think Lee will regress a bit but will remain somewhat near his level (below Pujols and Teixeira I guess, but his OPS+ has ranged from 110 (2004) to 170 (2005) (rounded) with a couple 130's in there recently), and really, Lee was just sick last year. Really, with Pujols, he's about 4 years and change younger and, what, almost twice the price? Is Pujols really the #1 player and Ortiz and Lee (Lee, being one of the best defensive 1B in baseball) not even worth listing?
Even if you believe Pujols is 26 years old, is the difference between not being close to the list and being #1: 4 years, 6 million more per year, and ? better production (this year, he wasn't better, last several years, he was a lot better)?
I think Pujols should be #1, but there's a huge age bias in there, perhaps too large to be good. I mean, if the Pirates offered Jason Bay around the league, I'm willing to say quite a few of those players below him would be heading to the Steel City in a straight-up trade, and Bay's not even affected by the age bias, just a complaint.
On the whole it's somewhat accurate, but there's some horrible flaws in there.
http://strike3forums.com/forums/phot...pelbon2006.jpg
Then out of fairness to the others you will be Slagathor.
One more thing about Ortiz, he can't list Hafner if he lists Ortiz. I saw his argument, and I don't buy it. When it comes down to it, you cancel out their equalities (and no, he has no defensive advantage, he played one game at 1B), it's essentially two years of youth for Hafner and actual full seasons for Ortiz. Hafner hasn't had a season over 600 PA. Neither did Ortiz until two years ago and he may do it this year.
http://strike3forums.com/forums/phot...pelbon2006.jpg
Then out of fairness to the others you will be Slagathor.
I think what he meant by the "big" comment was that his body is going to break down quickly as he gets older. But once again, that's just his opinon.
When you take so many things into account it is going to be hard to put together a list that makes sense 1-40. I think for the most part it is pretty good. There are a few glaring problems (Bay is too low, Wright is too high, Ortiz/Lee missing, the two A's players), but if you read his explanation for each it makes sense for the most part.
Register To Reply
