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 GiantsI meant the other fatass Molina.
I meant the other fatass Molina.
Originally Posted by love_that_reefer
Benjie doesn't look fat but maybe I'm only looking at his small head size and catcher gear.
Well, compared to Bartolo Colon....
Speaking of Molinas, I was watching the ANA/BOS game on FOX, and Thom Brennaman was talking about Yadier Molina. He said something to the effect of 'They thought so highly of Yadier that they let Mike Matheny walk in FA". That gave me a good laugh, they could just as easily think of Molina as any caliber MLB catcher and let Matheny walk for the amount of cash he got and the pick he was compensated for.
http://strike3forums.com/forums/phot...pelbon2006.jpg
Then out of fairness to the others you will be Slagathor.
Yup. Mike Matheny is a bad player, and an underdeveloped Molina is still a decent comp at a fraction of the cost. There isn't a win's difference between the two.
Molina's got a better arm behind the plate and is a lot younger and cheaper. I sure as hell wouldn't have kept Matheny if I knew Molina would turn out like he has. I don't know if he'll ever develop into a great hitter, but his early numbers are a lot like Pudge's were when he first broke into the league.
Logic, logic is brought up in this thread. All the statheads argue and debate their own useless, meaningless stats in defense of their choices and opinions, but the true LOGIC of it all escapes your feeble minds. Winning and what a player does to help his team win determines the best.
I ask each and every one of you stat mongers one simple question. Would you rather have a pitcher that goes 20-5 with a 4.50 ERA that gets you into the playoffs, or a pitcher that goes 10-15 with a 3.00 ERA that causes you team to miss the playoffs. Winning is the ONLY true measure of BEST.
joek brings up a good point. Why isn't Douglas Mirabelli on the list? He helped his team win the WS last year and by default that makes him the #2 catcher in the majors!
Not really. It means Mirabelli was the best back up catcher last year, not the second best catcher in baseball. Mirabelli did what was needed, as a backup catcher to help his team win the WS and achieve the goal of what the game is played for. (Team success, not individual success and losing.)
I was being sarcastic
I'd take the one that goes (10-15) with a 3.00 ERA, because chances are he'll get a team into the playoffs much more often than the other pitcher. The number of wins and losses is a team dependent statistic and has to do with run support among other factors.
There is no logic to the thinking here.
The Simpson family gathers around, as Homer places Bart's passed test on the fridge.)
Homer: We're proud of you, boy.
Bart: Thanks, Dad. But part of this D-minus belongs to God.
No problem, but I shy away from sarcasm when talking about how and why the game of baseball is played and who really are the best players.I was being sarcastic
You can take the importance of winning into an individual sport, such as golf. First you must agree on what determines the best golfer. The one who wins the most tournaments or the one who wins the most money. Different players may be the 'best' in categories...driving distance, fairways hit, least putts, most sand saves, etc.....but the best is the one who WINS.
One can't really say thar an individual player such as Doug Mirabelli was as important as say David Ortiz. I think the Sox would have won with or without Mirabelli. While you can say the Sox were the best team last year, you can't then stretch the argument to say that each individual player was the best at his position just because the team won...as a team they won, that doesn't make each the best individual player, which is the difference.
Fair enough. Then how can you say a player is the best or is great because of his individual stats. If a player does not help a team win consistently enough to be a playoff team, how can he be the best. He may hit the most HRs, or have the highest BA, have the highest RBI total, or the lowest ERA, but if they do not translate to wins for the team, he has not succeeded. Success of the team is the desired outcome of the game, not the success of individuals. Too many players, play for themsleves, with team success being secondary. They are not the best.
Your selection of the losing pitcher says alot about why your team has had so little success for several decades now. There is no logic to taking a pitcher that loses more often than he wins. The single most important thing a pitcher can do for his team is win. Every other stat is only fodder for the fantasy world league, and is meaningless to a point. If you have a staff that wins more than any other pitching staff, you go to the playoffs, it matters not what any other of their stats may be. That is solid logic. Winning is the solid granite of the baseball foundation.
Register To Reply
