Tommy Hanson has led the way.
by fandave on Sep 27, 2009 9:41 AM EDT
Email
Print
Thirteen Sundays and eighty games ago, on 6/28/09, Tommy Hanson took the mound despite flu-like symptoms, including fever, and being questionable for the start. The Braves had lost four in a row and were looking to avoid the shame of being swept at home by the Red Sox.
The Braves' record stood at a lackluster 34-40.
Of course, as many here will recall, Tommy came up huge that day, with 6 scoreless, 2 hit innings. And with Chipper and GA hitting solo homeruns and Gonzo getting out of a drama-filled jam in the 9th inning, the Braves squeaked out a 2-1 win.
Looking back, it was most definitely a turning point.
It began the current 50-30 run which has us locked in an exciting race for the first time in way too long.
In this block of the season, the Braves have been the best team in the National League (the Phillies have been 50-31 in the same time period) and the second best team in the Major Leagues (the Yankees have been 57-24).
Seriously, who would have thunk heading into that Sunday afternoon game, we would be where we are today?
Today's AJC write-up of Tommy's latest big win includes this DOB commentary and dead-on-the-money quote by team leader Brian (The Man) McCann:
No one is sure whether the resurgent Braves have enough time to complete an improbable dash for a postseason berth, but there’s no question that Tommy Hanson has been a big contributor to their stirring run.“He’s one of the biggest reasons,” catcher Brian McCann said after Hanson pitched seven strong innings in an 11-5 Braves win against Washington on a soggy Saturday at Nationals Park. “What he brings to the team is a guy who’s got No. 1 stuff and gives you a chance to win every time out.”
One of the biggest reasons indeed.
There can be no doubt Tommy brings No. 1 stuff.
But equally true is that Tommy also brings something else, an intangible I would call true grit.
That June 28th performance changed or at the least gave a big push to the dynamic and the mindset of our Team.
And, in my humble opinion, we would quite obviously not be here today without this outstanding young star anchoring the back of our rotation.
Tommy Hanson is the ROY.
This FanPost does not express the views or opinions of Talking Chop.
62 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Yeah, “he’s a fluke.”
lmao, quoting some other dude…
(self-appointed President of Yunel's Cartel~~~)
"The future is no place to place your better days." - Dave Matthews ~ RIP Roi
Chief! Do your anti-rain dance!!! Now, damn it! Now!!!
by Chief Noc-A-Homa on Sep 27, 2009 11:39 AM EDT reply actions
To believe some wanted to trade him for Peavy is almost a joke now, glad wren knows what he’s doing. However, I’d say that the subtraction of Francoeur and Kotchman (plus the addition of LaRoche and Church) have played a far greater role in this turnaround. Hanson has been better than expected though, and expectations were pretty damn high around here
by McCann's the Man on Sep 27, 2009 12:01 PM EDT reply actions
Don't forget about the Schafer-McLouth upgrade
Without looking at the WARP though, I would guess that the switch from Jo-Jo, Parr, and, admittedly, Medlen to Hanson had a huge impact.
I’m talking about the record since the Boston start, I don’t think you can really attribute that namely to a player who appears once every 5 days but rather getting rid of frenchy and kotchman as i said
by McCann's the Man on Sep 27, 2009 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions
The turnaround has been a full team effort that has included many, to notably include Javy, JJ, Hanson, KK, Moylan, Soriano (who has faded somewhat from overuse recently), Huddy (in the last few weeks), McCann, McLouth, Prado, LaRoche, Diaz and others.
Note that I listed 7 pitchers 1st, because I think the pitching staff has very clearly led the resurgence.
And in terms of the pitching staff, as well as the larger mental / psychological framework of the team as a whole, Hanson’s contribution should not be in any way, shape or form under-estimated — which is, of course, exactly what you are doing.
and it's starting to look like...
if we didn’t worry about “Super two” status, 1-3 more wins if he were making the starts earlier made by Jojo and Medlen might have actually made a difference in postseason/no postseason. (And I assume the revenue made from making the post season would be more than enough to cover Hanson being a Super two).
Exactly!
The whole “what if” financial machinations game infuriates me for this reason. It is a 162 season with each win or loss throughout the entire season being equally important.
Chipper was absolutely right when he boldly called out Wren 5 weeks ago and said leaving Hanson on the farm for the 1st two months had cost the team games.
And couldn’t we use those extra 1-3 wins about now!
It’s dangerous to think like that, though. We let several games slip through our fingers this year, that we should have won. You could make the case that our record “would be” better than Phillie, or the Rockies right now.
But it ain’t over yet….
(self-appointed President of Yunel's Cartel~~~)
"The future is no place to place your better days." - Dave Matthews ~ RIP Roi
Chief! Do your anti-rain dance!!! Now, damn it! Now!!!
by Chief Noc-A-Homa on Sep 27, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions
can you guarantee that he would have pitched like this for those first few starts? I certainly can’t so I don’t see how you can automatically pencil in those starts as wins. I’d say we could very well be competing for a title when Hanson enters his final arbitration year and that could be largely due to his smaller salary allowing us to add a couple other nice pieces, things to consider. Not having Hanson didn’t cause us to blow games like the first series where we allowed 7 runs in one inning to score against Philly.
by McCann's the Man on Sep 27, 2009 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Guarantee?...
Can you guarantee that if he’d been starting instead of Medlen/Reyes to start the year, we would have gone 3-5? His numbers throughout the season seem to lean pretty strongly in my favor sir. What evidence have you to say we wouldn’t have gone at least 4-4, if not 5-3 in those games?
And as for losing in several other games throughout the year, that’s not what is in debate here.
Fact is nobody knows how he would have pitched had he started the year in Atlanta, what we do know is that time in AAA served him well and he’s become a much better pitcher because of it. So while you people * and moan about how we would already be in the playoffs if he was up, Im just going to sit back and be estatic that we didn’t mess up his development in any way and enjoy the next 6 years of control we have for him. If you really want to look for reasons as to why we’re not in the playoffs yet, there are multiple things you look at before the date of Hanson’s call up.
by McCann's the Man on Sep 27, 2009 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The organization has a responsibility to put the best 25 players on the active roster and the best team on the field, and thereby attempt to win as many games as possible.
Period.
The rest is crap.
no, the idea that the organization has a responsibility to put the best 25 players on the active roster and the best team on the field, and that’s their only responsibility is crap.
The organization has a responsibility to facilitate their short term goals, with an eye towards long term goals as well. Its a balancing act. Teams that only try to win this year end up like the Brewers (a team with two of the best yong hitters in baseball, about 4 holes in the field and a rotation devoid of talent outside Gallardo). Theoretically, by promoting a player early you decrease his ceiling (I’m not saying this is the case for Hanson, or thats its always true, just that some think this is true and is a factor that needs to be weighed with young players).
Not to mention in the grand scheme of things.. Baseball is in fact a business. The only real responsibility an organization has is to its stockholders or the people who have a financial stake in the organization, everything else is secondary (it sucks once you realize this, but it is in fact true and you needn’t look further the Yankees or Marlins for me to prove it with completely opposing philosophies). It just so happens that for the most part the way you make money is by winning.
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
You are welcome to hold such opinions. I disagree.
In the case of Hanson, it seemed obvious that he was ready. There was no evidence to the contrary.
The Brewers have nothing whatsoever to do with this discussion.
But, yeah, just incidentally, winning is good business. Pure comedy!
DId it really seem obvious?
Because he had looked great against AA-level prospects in the AFL? Because he looked good against fringe major-leaguers in ST?
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Sep 28, 2009 12:18 AM EDT up reply actions
And because he dominated
AAA to start the year, and then proceeded to look like he more than belongs since getting to the bigs. But yeah, other than the man’s actual performance on the field, what do we got? Oh yeah, how about HOW THE MAN ACTUALLY PITCHED ON THE FIELD ALL YEAR LONG.
you have no evidence that he would have performed the way he did after the callup had he spent the entire year with ATL. If you can’t see this you fail at logic…
On the other hand I have indisputable evidence that Hanson is good now and he pitched in AAA this year… i know this process works for Tommy Hanson, because I have seen it. I have no evidence that he is good because of spending time in AAA.
basically this is a ridiculous argument on both sides, except my side seems to realize no one has any proof.
Let it go Indiana.
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
Actually,...
I’ll readily admit there is no evidence whatsoever on how the Braves would look if he was up all year long and that no one has proof one way or the other. I thought that point had come across in some of my comments on here already. But then, I’m not the one who was asking for a “guarantee” one way or the other on the issue like McCann’s the Man above.
by Mr. Sanchez on Sep 28, 2009 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions
ur welcome to hold any opinion you want… but when u base it off factually incorrect information… you might want to reconsider ur opinion
and i was using the Brewers as an example of a team who tried to win now with no respect for the future and now they may be screwed.
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
Dang-ma! You must have worked on this one – it is SPOT ON!
Nice post!
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Sep 28, 2009 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions
...except not.
They have a responsibility to build a consistent winner. Payroll and personnel control are a huge part of that.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Sep 28, 2009 12:18 AM EDT up reply actions
So if as you say, fact is "nobody knows"...
how are you so certain that he wouldn’t have pitched well right out the gate? Do you have any evidence to support such a theory? The man pitched great in the spring, carried that over to absolutely dominating AAA competition early, and has continued to show the great stuff and makeup since he arrived in the bigs. In a situation where all we are debating is what if, it’s easy to say “he’s pitched that well BECAUSE he got the months in Gwinnett”, but it’s just as easy to suppose if he was up he’d have been pitching well anyway.
Outside of the “fact” that no one knows just where the Braves would be right now if Hanson began opening day on the big club’s roster, what other "facts’ are you claiming? Mine are the kid has pitched lights out all year long regardless of where he is, we are 12-8 when he starts, and were 3-5 in the starts by those who were taking his turn in the rotation. That considered, chances are we’d have gone better than 3-5 in those 8 extra starts. Maybe 4-4, maybe 5-3 or even better, and that sir is enough to would be a significant factor in the standings. And other reasons for missing the playoffs has no bearing in this debate, since what we are simply saying is that leaving Hanson down is among those reasons, not the only reason.
See, all this supposition is ridiculous. You could make the argument that Tommy would have pitched well out of the gate in Atlanta, but that is only speculation. What we do know is that he spent two months in AAA and then, when he came up to Atlanta, was clearly a finished product and has pitched well.
Based off the evidence, we can at the very least make a correlational argument that he needed that AAA time, if only because he had it and it worked. But, any argument that he could have been just as successful the whole year in Atlanta is purely guesswork, since that scenario didn’t play out. Second guessing the team seems very odd in this situation since the way they handled the situation worked so perfectly and there’s nothing concrete to suggest it would have worked out the same had they done things differently.
"At least he didn’t nail the bitchy fat girl from Hell's Kitchen."
www.dropoutproductions.com
i just realized i said that exact same thing as you essentially.
great minds my friend (although i don’t know if “great” applies in this case, for me at least)
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
Questions
Is it reasonable to assume that Hanson would have continued pitching as well as he did throughout the summer with another 50 big league IPs on his arm in April/May?
Do you concede that it’s possible that he would have fatigued as the season wore on?
Are you aware of the Verducci effect? Did the risk of arm injury to Hanson in future years factor into your analysis?
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
8 starts at say 6 innings per puts him 48 vs. the 66 he had in Gwinnett.
Yes, he would likely fatigue some as the season wore on. But why would he fatigue any more than he already has? Again, the innings argument, imo, isn’t strong considering he likely wouldn’t have logged any more wear and tear in 45-50 innings here vs. 66 there.
He has more chance of injury at the big league level vs. AAA? How so?
by Mr. Sanchez on Sep 28, 2009 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Big league innings are harder, since the quality of the hitters is better. Thus, more pitches with greater effort.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
and isn't that balanced out...
by the longer outings and ultimately more innings pitched at the lower level? I agree, big league innings are harder than AAA innings, but in terms of wear and tear on the arm or potential for injury, the difference in total number of innings pitched has to be taken into account.
Who knows? This whole argument has moved so far into the realm of speculation, it’s hard to come up with any definites. However, conventional wisdom is that you don’t count on a full major league season from your rookie hurlers, especially after a fairly full offseason in the AFL and a long spring training. In addition, perhaps the Braves wished to spare Hanson the added injury risks associated with pitching on irregular rest, as Reyes did.
Ultimately I have faith that Wren and the Braves talent evalution, who have much more information (and skill) than folks looking in from afar, made the correct decision.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
At the time, too...
There was one Tom Glavine involved. He was on track to be a decent #5 until he got hurt.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Sep 29, 2009 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I think
The Braves went 3-4 in starts by Medlen and Reyes in April/May.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
I went back and checked,...
Medlen’s starts saw 1 win, 2 losses, while Reyes’ 5 starts had a record of 2-3.
Another point to be made, which I believe someone has pointed out already, is the jump in innings pitch. Pitching at the ML level is much much MUCH more stressful than pitching in AAA. By holding Hanson back just a bit, we not only protect money with the “super 2” or whatever, but we also let Tommy work his way into a full season. We could have had him the entire season, but how would he be doing now? I think he may have been tiring by now.
Facts.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Sep 28, 2009 12:16 AM EDT up reply actions
By the same token...
The extra seasoning in AAA could well have been something that aided Hanson in his stellar performance thus far.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Sep 28, 2009 12:16 AM EDT up reply actions
It could, but it could not too...
no one ever will know. Fact remains, this team is looking like it might be a game or two short of making the postseason. And among the several games that slipped away throughout the year, failing to have Hanson in the rotation from opening day and going 3-5 in the 8 starts by Medlen and Reyes could be argued among them.
there are a lot other things that lead to our losing record than those things… this s like the 5th-6th best argument to explain why we aren’t leading a playoff race
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
Agreed,...
but it is a legit argument imo, which is upsetting when McCann and others dismiss it so callously. I wasn’t trying to start a debate like this, just the simple idea that the team might have done 1-3 games better overall if Hanson is starting from day 1 in the spot held by Reyes and then Medlen until he arrived, and that the “super two” spending would have been to an extent covered by revenue would have come from making the postseason.
by Mr. Sanchez on Sep 28, 2009 10:57 AM EDT up reply actions
If the Braves did make the playoffs, I assume your scenario would have them shutting Hanson down.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
There's a similar chance...
he gets shut down any way IF they make the playoffs. His total innings pitched wouldn’t be any greater, and he’d still be at best 3rd, or at worst 5th, choice to start a game and who knows how the staff feels about using him out of the bullpen (a role he’s never really done before). So that point, imo, is moot.
Really? You think the chance that Hanson would get shut down for the playoffs (if the Braves made it) would be the same regardless of whether he pitched a full MLB season or not?
I think you have decided your stance; further discussion doesn’t seem productive.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
No, I said...
considering his position in the staff (would he be chosen to start over Hudson or Lowe, as he’s clearly behind Jurrjens and Vasquez, or for the bullpen when he’s never done it before at this level), he is likely to not spend much time pitching in the post season IF we make it that far. Honestly, who’s innings are you cutting out to fit him in?
And I still fail to see a difference between spending April/May pitching 45-50 innings in the majors vs. 65+ in AAA when considering whether or not to shut him down. If we are going by overall innings pitched as the time frame for shutting him down, don’t the extra 15-20+ innings matter?
Frankly, I would already have shut Hanson down. I would have done so when Hudson came back and demonstrated that he was healthy and effective. But that’s not the point.
AAA innings are simply not as taxing as MLB IPs. I don’t have a formula to provide to you on just how much less taxing they are, and whether more less taxing AAA IPs are harder on an arm than fewer more taxing MLB IPs. However, with a golden arm like Hanson, teams are typically better served not burning their arms out when they are new to the league, even if the team sorely needs to scrape out an extra win or two in a stretch run or during the playoffs. Those are the kinds of decisions that can crush an organization for years. (See, e.g., Mark Prior.)
Golden arms like Hanson’s only come around once a decade, if you’re lucky. If for whatever reasons (workload, innings, team control), an organization decides to manage that golden arm, I have absolutely no problem with it.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
I will say this.. you have the whole world against you and have handled yourself really well. I personally appreciate an argument based on facts and opinions (although I favor facts, in this case facts are severely lacking). As Yakker said it doesn’t appear you will change your mind, and that’s fine. So I too shall bow out of this discussion. But thank you for the time.
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
I don’t know why you keep calling me out, all i said was there are multiple other reasons to look at first and that there’s no guarantee that he wins those games. I find it hard not to accept those as fact. Like I’ve said time and time before there are many things you can look at as to why this team is currently out of the playoffs and most are not near as costly as calling up Hanson earlier so while I would agree that he probably could have been called up and helped us let’s not go overboard with this argument. As was stated before me there are much bigger WAR differences between guys like Frenchy and Church, Kotch and LaRocher, Schafer and McLouth.
by McCann's the Man on Sep 28, 2009 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions
You have to look at the supporting cast too. JoJo and Kris had Schafer, Francoeur, sucky Anderson and sucky Johnson behind them.
Tommy has had Nate, hot Prado, Church/Diaz and decent-good Anderson.
Look at the WAR difference in those guys and then make the argument.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Sep 28, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Good points...
I had not looked at that aspect.
Have said before, I’ve never seen much with advanced stats like WAR and don’t understand them much at all.
by Mr. Sanchez on Sep 28, 2009 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
at this point this is what u need to know
WAR of Schafer, Frenchy, slumping KJ, bad Andeson < WAR of Nate, Hot Prado, Church Diaz, good Anderson
which I’m sure u figured out anyway
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
I also forgot to include the Kotch vs LaRoche situation.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Sep 28, 2009 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Not just grit, but TRUE grit.
LOLmax.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Sep 28, 2009 12:14 AM EDT reply actions
And we are chock full of that man!
I thought hurricane season was over........
by bravesguy311 on Sep 28, 2009 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Shoulda, woulda, coulda, if, when and why
Man, talking about a decent post going to hell in a hand basket ….
Fact: Tommy Hanson was called up “when” he was called up, has pitched great and we are where we are because things happened exactly the way they did.
Outside of that nobody on this board, or any other for that matter, can say whether TH would have been any better or any worse whether he was called up sooner or later. So making statements saying it was a mistake to hold him down is just as stupid as saying he wouldn’t have been as good or the Braves would have more wins had he been called up any other time.
I for one am just happy I was wrong about TH, I thought for sure he would struggle coming into the league with his flyball tendencies. Now i’m just happy to be celebrating the fact we have one helluva power pitcher on our hands and am looking forward to watching him pitch in a Braves uniform for years to come.
You aren’t the czar of typographic emphasis
Never said it was a mistake...
but at the end of 162 games, if you come up just one or two games short, people tend to wonder “what if”. What if this changed or that changed, could that have made up for the one or two game difference? IMO, Tommy Hanson being up at the beginning of the year vs. two months in could be among those “what ifs”. It’s not a mistake, it just is what it is.
by Mr. Sanchez on Sep 28, 2009 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions
The proper calculation should also balance those “what if” two months, where he may or may not have added a W or two over Jo Jo/Medlen, may have struggled, may have blown out his arm, or may have pitched well but then tired in September (or October, if the Braves get there).
All of those “ifs” versus the certainty of how Hanson has pitched and one more cost-controlled year in 2015. I’ll take it.
If Albert played in the AFL, they’d have to rename it the AZ/NM Fall League, based on where his homers landed.
I don’t know if I would say that Hanson has led the way. He has been PART of the reason, but not THE reason – after all, he only pitches every 5th game.
I think we need to look to guys like Adam LaRoche and Matt Diaz if we want to talk about why we are on such a ridiculous tear of late.
Also, ALL of the starting pitching has been pretty stellar down the stretch, and to say that Hanson is leading the team is a bit inaccurate, IMO. If any SP has “led” this team, I would vote for the guy with the CGs – Javier Vazquez.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Sep 28, 2009 12:46 PM EDT reply actions
u really could have used a better stat than CG to back that up…other than that tho I agree
Heyward,Hanson,and Shaffer r ready now!! Why do you think they havent signed the "right handed bat"?
by fatazfoot on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 PM EST
hahaha…yeah, I thought about that too, but oh well.
I wasn’t really trying to use it as a “stat” per-se, but more of a seperator.
"My team of nine guys who hit like Albert Pujols and never ever bunt just beat your team with one Shane Victorino 472 to 3."
by justincredubil02 on Sep 28, 2009 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Perhaps I should wade back in with a few clarifications.
1. I agree and the post doesn’t suggest otherwise. I’ve already futher commented that although the pitching staff (to most notably include Javy, JJ, Hanson, KK, Moylan, Soriano (who has faded somewhat from overuse recently), Huddy (in the last few weeks) has very clearly led the resurgence, the turnaround has been a full team effort.
2. The primary point of the post is the team has had an amazing 80 (now 81) game run that just incidentally happened to start with a huge performance under duress by Hanson, and that gut-it-out effort by the Rook may have been a bigger lift or had a more significant inspirational impact than has heretofore been appreciated by the exaulted purveyors of wisdom around these parts.
3. Obviously, every young baseball player has to be evaluated by professional baseball talent evaluators and a decision has to be made – rightly or wrongly – as to whether that particular player is ready to make an important contribution to the success of the team. Now, there is no one on this board who has more respect than me for the Braves’ baseball talent evaluators; and if the point is that Hanson needed two more months on the farm and it was a wise baseball decision to hold him down, well fine — they are in the best position to make that call. But, on the other hand, if the determining factor was managing his arbitration eligability – which is a constant issue raised here by many – then I think that is just a crazy sick damn shame. Frankly, it was one or the other, and I don’t know which. Nor does anyone else.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
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.
