January 24, 200818 yr Seems like you're the one making excuses for A-Rod.:sssh: C'mon both teams got better after he left, the Yankees haven't been able to get back to the World Series with him and in the process served up the biggest choke job in baseball history. He's hit an even .200 with 3 HR and 6 RBIs 12 BB and 21 Ks in his last 4 postseason series (20 games). And you don't think that maybe, just maybe he comes up small when it matters most? He's a great statistical player and one or two of these occurances I could write off as a coincidence but when it happens over and over then the burden shifts to the player to show that it isn't his fault. No, I'm making sense of the toughest thing to do in all of sport. You're showing your lack of baseball (or sports in general) knowledge if you think one person, not a pitcher, but one person that comes up to bat every 2-3 innings with or without men on base is the reason they 1) choked and 2) haven't won a World Series. On top of that, you really must think it's easy to hit at the MLB level and win a World Championship.
January 24, 200818 yr Solid offensive, can't hide "terrible" pitching. 2000 Seattle Mariners with A-Rod 907 Runs Scored 2001 Seattle Mariners without A-Rod 927 Runs Scored 2003 Texas Rangers with A-Rod 826 Runs Scored 2004 Texas Rangers without A-Rod 860 Runs Scored 2003 New York Yankees without A-Rod 877 Runs Scored 2004 New York Yankees with A-Rod 897 Runs Scored In two of the three cases the teams scored more runs WITHOUT A-Rod than with him. In the third the team scored 20 runs more. If you add it up over 3 seasons the teams scored a net of 34 runs more WITHOUT A-Rod. How much difference does he really make and is it enough to overcome a questionable clubhouse presence, a crippling payroll figure and his postseason failures?
January 24, 200818 yr Seems like you're the one making excuses for A-Rod.:sssh: C'mon both teams got better after he left, the Yankees haven't been able to get back to the World Series with him and in the process served up the biggest choke job in baseball history. He's hit an even .200 with 3 HR and 6 RBIs 12 BB and 21 Ks in his last 4 postseason series (20 games). And you don't think that maybe, just maybe he comes up small when it matters most? He's a great statistical player and one or two of these occurances I could write off as a coincidence but when it happens over and over then the burden shifts to the player to show that it isn't his fault. Here is some Stats, on the teams you mentioned... 2000 Mariners - 4.50 ERA 2001 Mariners - 3.54 ERA 2003 Rangers - 5.67 ERA 2004 Rangers - 4.53 ERA I see a trend, in relation to wins.
January 24, 200818 yr Here is some Stats, on the teams you mentioned... 2000 Mariners - 4.50 ERA 2001 Mariners - 3.54 ERA Stop making sense. As stated, if you want to say Pujols because he free's up more money for things like pitching, fine. But to blindly look at one stat or transaction is ludicrous...
January 24, 200818 yr No, I'm making sense of the toughest thing to do in all of sport. You're showing your lack of baseball (or sports in general) knowledge if you think one person, not a pitcher, but one person that comes up to bat every 2-3 innings with or without men on base is the reason they 1) choked and 2) haven't won a World Series. On top of that, you really must think it's easy to hit at the MLB level and win a World Championship. I keep up with baseball just fine and don't really appreciate the personal attack. I played in college and watch probably 150 games a year on tv or in person. I know that he isn't responsible for every at bat and I know very well how hard it is to hit at any level, let alone MLB. However, he seems to be able to do it just fine during the regular season but comes up small when it matters most. Evidently Joe Torre recognized it as well, how else do you account for A-Rod being dropped to what 7th or 8th in the order in 2006 in the playoffs. Again he's a great statistical player but I'd rather have a player that I can count to hit in every situation and to help lead my team--to me in those areas there's no comparison between A-Rod and Pujols. Pujols is far superior. If you want to talk about ticket sales fine, A-Rod generates plenty of headlines but if I need someone to grind out an at bat in a tough situation I'd take Pujols any day.
January 24, 200818 yr 2000 Seattle Mariners with A-Rod 907 Runs Scored 2001 Seattle Mariners without A-Rod 927 Runs Scored 2003 Texas Rangers with A-Rod 826 Runs Scored 2004 Texas Rangers without A-Rod 860 Runs Scored 2003 New York Yankees without A-Rod 877 Runs Scored 2004 New York Yankees with A-Rod 897 Runs Scored In two of the three cases the teams scored more runs WITHOUT A-Rod than with him. In the third the team scored 20 runs more. If you add it up over 3 seasons the teams scored a net of 34 runs more WITHOUT A-Rod. How much difference does he really make and is it enough to overcome a questionable clubhouse presence, a crippling payroll figure and his postseason failures? You're basing your choice, off post-season performance and then, attempting to attribute team productivity, to one player. I recall Andre Dawson winning the MVP, for the last place Cubs and it was because, his talent and year, were outstanding but his surrounding talent, was woeful. Offense is great and needed but you have to keep the other team, from scoring more and A-Rod or Pujols, has very little control in that area.
January 24, 200818 yr You're basing your choice, off post-season performance and then, attempting to attribute team productivity, to one player. I recall Andre Dawson winning the MVP, for the last place Cubs and it was because, his talent and year, were outstanding but his surround talent, was woeful. Offense is great and needed but you have to keep the other team, from scoring more and A-Rod or Pujols, has very little control in that area. No, I'm trying to show that A-Rod had little if no effect on 3 teams offensive production and with that fact in mind I would rather have the player that has proven that he can produce when the pressure is the most intense. I'm not saying that A-Rod isn't a great player just that Pujols has demonstrated that he can produce at the same level and he's also exhibited the ability to produce in the postseason. When the best player in the game has to be dropped to 7th or 8th in the order in a postseason series to me that shows a lack of mental toughness.
January 24, 200818 yr If you want to say that it was because he (Pujols) free'd up so much cash, as I said before, fine. Not my cup of tea if you're trying to build around the best player in the game, though... But you would use for a criteria who would fill the most seats (by chasing the all-time homerun record)? First off, it'll take years for A-Rod to get to that level, so you won't get the immediate "seat-filling" benefit. At present time, I don't think A-Rod would put any more people in the seats than would Pujols anyway. Pujols and A-Rod are both great, great players. Offensively, they are very similar. A-Rod offers a stolen base threat and some additional value defensively, but Pujols higher OBP is a major plus for him. Ultimately, if I'm GM, you HAVE to factor in salary in making this decision. I can have Pujols for half the cost of A-Rod? That's huge, IMO. That buys me some nice pitching and, as a GM building a new team, that's pretty important. Add in the fact that Pujols is 5 years younger and it becomes an even easier decision to me.
January 24, 200818 yr But you would use for a criteria who would fill the most seats (by chasing the all-time homerun record)? First off, it'll take years for A-Rod to get to that level, so you won't get the immediate "seat-filling" benefit. At present time, I don't think A-Rod would put any more people in the seats than would Pujols anyway. Pujols and A-Rod are both great, great players. Offensively, they are very similar. A-Rod offers a stolen base threat and some additional value defensively, but Pujols higher OBP is a major plus for him. Ultimately, if I'm GM, you HAVE to factor in salary in making this decision. I can half Pujols for half the cost of A-Rod? That's huge, IMO. That buys me some nice pitching and, as a GM building a new team, that's pretty important. Add in the fact that Pujols is 5 years younger and it becomes an even easier decision to me. I'm confused with your first sentence. Are you agreeing with me or disagreeing? ARod will fill seats within the next 5 seasons. If we're talking a Cincinnati team, fine. LA, CHI, NY...etc...it shouldn't be a big deal...
January 24, 200818 yr I'm confused with your first sentence. Are you agreeing with me or disagreeing? ARod will fill seats within the next 5 seasons. If we're talking a Cincinnati team, fine. LA, CHI, NY...etc...it shouldn't be a big deal... Neither, really. Just saying (or at least trying to) that it seems odd that you would not use salary difference as a criteria in your decision, but would use who you think would fill more seats. Even assuming that A-Rod puts more people in the seats - and I'm not sure I agree with that, at least not short term anyways - it won't be worth $13-14M.
January 24, 200818 yr Neither, really. Just saying (or at least trying to) that it seems odd that you would not use salary difference as a criteria in your decision, but would use who you think would fill more seats. Even assuming that A-Rod puts more people in the seats - and I'm not sure I agree with that, at least not short term anyways - it won't be worth $13-14M. Oh, then maybe I wasn't as confused as I thought you thought I was...:creepy: It really depends on the market that I'm in. If it doesn't matter, like the Yankees I'd take ARod without question or hesitation because he's the best player in the game. If I had a budget then maybe I'll take that into affect. However, being a GM and making this decision is as far fetched as not having budget concerns so I went that route...
January 24, 200818 yr Oh, then maybe I wasn't as confused as I thought you thought I was...:creepy: It really depends on the market that I'm in. If it doesn't matter, like the Yankees I'd take ARod without question or hesitation because he's the best player in the game. If I had a budget then maybe I'll take that into affect. However, being a GM and making this decision is as far fetched as not having budget concerns so I went that route... Makes sense. Ultimately, choosing between Pujols and A-Rod is almost like asking if you want a million dollars in $20's or $1's. Both seem acceptable to me. And you never know - Castellini may read this sight, recognize your brilliance, and voila - you're GM. :ylsuper:
January 24, 200818 yr I keep up with baseball just fine and don't really appreciate the personal attack. I played in college and watch probably 150 games a year on tv or in person. I know that he isn't responsible for every at bat and I know very well how hard it is to hit at any level, let alone MLB. However, he seems to be able to do it just fine during the regular season but comes up small when it matters most. Evidently Joe Torre recognized it as well, how else do you account for A-Rod being dropped to what 7th or 8th in the order in 2006 in the playoffs. Again he's a great statistical player but I'd rather have a player that I can count to hit in every situation and to help lead my team--to me in those areas there's no comparison between A-Rod and Pujols. Pujols is far superior. If you want to talk about ticket sales fine, A-Rod generates plenty of headlines but if I need someone to grind out an at bat in a tough situation I'd take Pujols any day. Awe come on! That wasn't personal, you just took it personal. If you want a shot at the title, just let me know. :lol::lol: I'm just kidding, I love that last line and needed to use it. Didn't mean to make it sound personal, I just don't believe that one person can be blamed for wins/losses. A play or two that took place during the game that contributed to a win or loss sure, it can't be all on him though.
January 24, 200818 yr Makes sense. Ultimately, choosing between Pujols and A-Rod is almost like asking if you want a million dollars in $20's or $1's. Both seem acceptable to me. And you never know - Castellini may read this sight, recognize your brilliance, and voila - you're GM. :ylsuper: I agree... ***I did not pay cooperstown to say this***
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.