Let's be honest...
by bravesfanldh on Nov 22, 2011 4:24 PM EST
Email
Print
If Chipper was a free agent this year and still wanted to play, would you resign him or move on to younger players, prepare for the future, and thank him for all he's done?
And, does anyone else find it strange that there were more rumors about Mark Cuban buying the Braves (a team that he openly stated no interest in and one that's not even for sale as of yet) than there were of him buying the Houston Astros. In fact, I never heard any about him buying the Astros, yet the fit his bill perfectly. They are a team that needs a lot of help and he already owns the Dallas Mavericks so why not get another professional sports franchise in Texas? Just seems strange to me, anyone else think he tried but got massively denied?
This FanPost does not express the views or opinions of Talking Chop.
138 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'd sign him
even if he only gives you 100-120 games, he’s still a dangerous hitter, and was one of the most consistent hitters the Braves had last year (when he was in the lineup)…
Clearly
you’re not being honest.
Most people use statistics the way a drunk would use a lamppost—for support, and not for illumination.
www.duwanis.com
Yes I would sign him
And I think you never heard anything about Cuban buying the Astros because we didn’t want them to be in the AL which was a condition of the sale.
Lead off walks usually lead to runs, unless they don't. -Joe Simpson
If you don't like the way the Atlanta Braves are playing, then you don't like baseball. -Chuck Tanner
I meant "he didn't want"
I actually am okay with the reailignment
Lead off walks usually lead to runs, unless they don't. -Joe Simpson
If you don't like the way the Atlanta Braves are playing, then you don't like baseball. -Chuck Tanner
I love number 10 w/ all my Braves heart... BUT...
I would NOT resign him… I would lure him back as a coach in a heart beat… if he wanted to play, I’d let him go… In this free agent market, I would put his money towards Aramis Ramirez.
Call me crazy or whatever. I have loved Larry since he was in the minors and I was a little boy… But if I ran the organization, I would make him a lucrative offer to join the suit side of baseball… not the field side. Sometimes you just have to make the right call for the FUTURE of your franchise…
I am probably in the minority and in the words of a VERY famous journalist…. If you disagree, you are wrong.
Don’t worry about older women until you turn 22. It’s called the Saltalamacchia.
by bwellnjonesco on May 19, 2011 4:13 PM PDT
I agree.
I would, however, love to resign him as a backup 3B/pinch hitter.
If we can land [Stephen Drew], I will give FW a bj.
~justincredubil02
by king of games on Nov 22, 2011 5:11 PM EST up reply actions
That just cracks me up.
The day that Chipper Jones has to take a bench role is the day that he retires.
Most people use statistics the way a drunk would use a lamppost—for support, and not for illumination.
www.duwanis.com
by duwanis on Nov 22, 2011 5:13 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Actually, it wouldn’t surprise me to see him get 20-25 appearances as a PH in 2012. Not because he’s willing to sit on the bench, but because at points in the season that will be all he can do.
"Some people give their bodies to science. I gave mine to baseball." -- Ron Hunt
He got several PH opportunities this year, too
but that didn’t qualify him as “taking a bench role.” He was still our starting 3B, and will be until he retires.
Most people use statistics the way a drunk would use a lamppost—for support, and not for illumination.
www.duwanis.com
Well yeah
But at some point the word “starting” gets stretched… I will be surprised if Chipper starts 110 games next year. Which doesn’t really bear on this thread in particular, but one point I have been trying to make to people is that one of the reasons we need to hang on to Prado if possible is because someone’s got to start at least one-third of our games at 3B in 2012, even if he’s officially a “bench” player.
"Some people give their bodies to science. I gave mine to baseball." -- Ron Hunt
I don't think it's stretched that much.
A starting player for a given position is a person who starts every game that they’re healthy and able to start. A bench player is someone who comes in when one of the starters isn’t able to play, or needs a break.
Most people use statistics the way a drunk would use a lamppost—for support, and not for illumination.
www.duwanis.com
but in the context of team needs
that is misleading
..?
Was Chipper a “bench player” last year because he came in as a PH a few times? Or was he our starting 3B? There’s nothing misleading about it.
Most people use statistics the way a drunk would use a lamppost—for support, and not for illumination.
www.duwanis.com
I wouldn’t sign him for the money he’s making now, but if he were willing to sign on for $8-10 MM, then yeah I’d sign him.
Q: If not us, who? If not now, when? A: The Batman. And "when you least expect it."
In a vaccum, I agree
Meaning that had Chipper not devoted his life to this team, stood as the captain and heartbeat of the team, and taken pay cuts to better this team, then yes I agree I would not be willing to go over 8-10 million for him. I do think that even as an unconnected free agent he is still one of the best 3B in the game when he is healthy and last year his health wasn’t too bad. So yeah I would pay him 8-10 mill. However, given the reality of the situation I am perfectly fine paying for him what we are. Chipper deserves/has earned every penny that he gets. Frankly, for the production we have gotten over the years from him, I am thankful that we got such a bargain.
We are reasonably overpaying now for what we long have gained from his production as a 1st ballot HOFer at a premium price. Yeah he breaks down now and then as a grandpa in the game, but we are blessed to have had him playing for us throughout his entire long career.
All while Fredi is surrounded by a bunch of orangutans, trying to teach them how to bunt the rocks and coconuts that angry 300 lb gorillas are throwing at them,
by royhobbs on Jul 29, 2011 11:20 AM PDT
Strong Side / Weak Side: Chipper Jones
http://www.onionsportsnetwork.com/articles/chipper-jones,8431/
by Santaklose11 on Nov 24, 2011 1:15 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
That’s all fine, I understand it. The question was if you’d sign Chipper if he were a FA, which I wouldn’t at $13 MM, but would at $8-10 MM. Actually if I were in FW’s shoes and felt like I needed a few million for a key FA signing, I’d go to Chipper and offer to replace his current 1yr/option yr deal with a guaranteed 2 year/$20 MM deal, with a $3 MM bonus if he chooses to retire at any point before the start of the 2013 season.
Q: If not us, who? If not now, when? A: The Batman. And "when you least expect it."
i think he's full of it
yeah he wants a fixer upper but he wants a big market team.
Let's be honest
Chipper Jones ranks among NL 3B in 2011 (Min 250 PAs)
wOBA – 7th
wRC+ – 8th
OBP – 9th
SLG – 3rd
OPS – 3rd
WAR – 9th
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 22, 2011 10:31 PM EST reply actions
So basically, he provided the median in value for 3B last year, yet was payed $14M. Obviously he provides a skillset that you can’t empirically measure (i.e. coaching and “veteran presence”), but I would not re-sign him at that same salary. Maybe if he was a hypothetical, sentimenatlly-neutral player with the same value and “intangibles”, I would sign him for 1 year at $8M tops, but because he’s Chipper Jones, he’ll make $13M next year instead.
And he has provided top-tier value for 3B over the last decade and has made significantly less than he should have.
We aren’t paying Chipper for 2012. We are paying him for 2000-2009
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 22, 2011 11:22 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly. Like I said, maybe if he was a player who has no history with the Braves he would make significantly less, but these last few years on his contact are a kind of much-deserved ‘’thanks for your contributions’’ message after all that he’s done for the team and for the franchise.
by swainzy on Nov 22, 2011 11:42 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Or let me clarify:
I agree that he 100% deserves what he’s being paid right now because he’s earned it, but if I was a GM for some other team, I would not sign him at nearly his current salary.
by swainzy on Nov 22, 2011 11:49 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
That's fair
He won’t put up numbers worthy of his contract right now. It’s the same situation as Derek Jeter and his contract with the Yankees.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 23, 2011 12:31 AM EST up reply actions
Chipper’s Market value is about $5-6 mil to me if he was a free agent, he’d get a 1 yr, incentive heavy deal for about that much.
For me, I think in the AL, he gets more as a DH/3B. Closer to $4M base +$4-5M easily reached incentives, just in case his knee goes out in May.
There are other people here who have a better feel for this kind of thing though…
"I have a dream that our twelve pitchers will one day play in a city where they will not be judged solely by statistics, but on the quality and consistency of their pitches." - MLK, Jr.
Slighty different situation than Jeter
I think Jeter got his max value in every contract, while Chip may have left some on the table during his career to stay with the Braves. That means we pay the extra $5M this year for his loyalty during his prime.
"I have a dream that our twelve pitchers will one day play in a city where they will not be judged solely by statistics, but on the quality and consistency of their pitches." - MLK, Jr.
Chipper isn’t great because of his intangibles. He’s great because he is the 2nd best offensive 3B in the history of the game, and one of the top 3 switch hitters in the history of the game, behind only Schmidt in the former category and Mantle and Murray in the latter.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 22, 2011 11:23 PM EST up reply actions
Arguable...
I’d say he’s better than Murray, but hasn’t been (and won’t be) able to get as many ABs because he doesn’t play in the AL.
Most people use statistics the way a drunk would use a lamppost—for support, and not for illumination.
www.duwanis.com
Bad wording on my part.
I said he’s “top 3” but didn’t mean to put them in any order, as I’m not sure where I would put him.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 23, 2011 8:04 AM EST up reply actions
Gotcha.
Why wouldn’t you put him second, though? If you compare Chipper and Murray, Murray’s only real advantage is that he’s played for longer. All of the rate stats seem to consistently favor Chipper.
Most people use statistics the way a drunk would use a lamppost—for support, and not for illumination.
www.duwanis.com
Because I haven’t looked at the numbers in over a year. lol
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 23, 2011 8:09 AM EST up reply actions
You forget Pete Rose?
I love Chipper, he is my favorite player in sports period. But, I got Rose above Chipper.
1. Mantle
2. Rose
3. Chipper/Murray
4. Chipper/Murray
Can’t argue with Mantle first, and come on Rose has all time hits, I don’t see anyone touching that period, guy was an amazing player. Chipper and Murray, I wouldn’t argue against someone for putting Chipper 3rd or Murray 3rd. I probably give the edge to Chipper because of the position he played, but both are/were amazing players.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
Rose was a great hitter, no doubt
but compare these two slash lines and tell me which one is a better hitter:
A) .304/.402/.533/.935
B) .303/.375/.409/.784
Most people use statistics the way a drunk would use a lamppost—for support, and not for illumination.
www.duwanis.com
very unfair to judge that slash line of .533/.935 of Jones with .409/.784 for Rose. Obviously Jones is going to come out way ahead because he was more of a a power hitter, much more in fact. Rose was a slap hitter and to get on at any cost. The .304/.402 with .303/.375 is much better to say. We all know that Chipper was more of a power guy than Rose, that is no secret. Better at getting on base as well. Overall Chipper had more power, Rose got more hits. I still think Rose was the better switch hitter, can’t keep the all time hits record king out of top two, but that’s just me.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
not only was Chipper the better power hitter, he was also better at getting on base, unless Rose was supremely a better defender, there is nothing to suggest he is better than Chipper, unless you value longevity.
Also he played more in LF and 1B than he did 3B, so I’m not even sure he qualifies as a 3B.
the All-time hits leader is merely a designation based on his longevity, obviously he was a great hitter too, a 303 average is nothing to scoff at (although again Chipper’s is better), but average isn’t as illustrative of performance as OBP is.
"No. Lonely people mixing with one another? Breeding? Creating an even lonelier generation? You're not even allowing natural selection do its work. Pssh. You're like the guy who invented the seat belt."
Dwight Schrute
i now realize you were talking about all time switch hitters not 3B, so i retract any statements pertaining to that dispute
"No. Lonely people mixing with one another? Breeding? Creating an even lonelier generation? You're not even allowing natural selection do its work. Pssh. You're like the guy who invented the seat belt."
Dwight Schrute
Rose was getting on at all costs yet still ended up getting on .027 points less than Chipper. Face it, Chipper was a better player.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it:
http://www.amazon.com/Four-C-B-Wilkins/dp/1449578454/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257720610&sr=1-1
www.dropoutproductions.com
Rose played a ridiculously long amount of time and still kept a strong AVG and OBP. If Chipper played for the same amount of years as Rose, his OBP would not be .402, it would be closer to Rose’s .375 mark than, .402. Keeping his career OBP that high for that many years is a testiment to how great a hitter Rose was. If you wanna disagree then fine, afterall it is your opinion, but this is my opinion too. I don’t have to face anything, I think Rose was better, again my opinion.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
Chipper Jones has a .402 OBP in 17 seasons from ages 23 to 39. In the 17 seasons Rose played from ages 23 to 39 he had a .382 OBP. So while you could make the argument that if Chipper played as long as Rose his OBP would drop, I could make the much more valid argument that over the same period of time at the same ages that Chipper had a better OBP, along with more power.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it:
http://www.amazon.com/Four-C-B-Wilkins/dp/1449578454/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257720610&sr=1-1
www.dropoutproductions.com
You forget that Rose played in his 40’s and his OBP went down from his norm a good bit. Other than 2 years in his 40’s(with enough AB’s to really count it), his OBP was down, which helped lower his career OBP even more. If Chipper plays until then, there is no doubt that his OBP will take a hit too. Completely ignoring this is not very smart. Again, if Chipper plays the same number of years, his career OBP will be closer to Rose career OBP than .402. Either way, I admit that Chipper was better at getting on base than Rose, which I never said the contrary.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
The point isn’t that Chipper’s OBP would get lower if he played as long as Rose, I think most of us would concede that point, the point is that over the same period of time at the same ages Chipper’s OBP was 20 points higher. The fact that Chipper’s overall numbers might get worse over more time doesn’t really matter, because we can compare their actual numbers over the same period of time over the same ages and see that Chipper was clearly better at getting on base.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it:
http://www.amazon.com/Four-C-B-Wilkins/dp/1449578454/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257720610&sr=1-1
www.dropoutproductions.com
Which I never said Rose had a better OBP or was as patient a hitter as Chipper or anything like that. At the end of the careers, Chipper would have a better OBP, never once denied this…
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
The point I’m getting at is that it doesn’t matter that Chipper’s OBP would decline over time.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it:
http://www.amazon.com/Four-C-B-Wilkins/dp/1449578454/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257720610&sr=1-1
www.dropoutproductions.com
Or, rather, that he'd arguably still end up with a higher OBP than Rose, even if he played 5 more years
I’m too lazy to crunch the numbers right now, but I’m betting Chipper could OBP .330 for 5 more seasons and still come out ahead of Rose.
My buddy and I just decided that the braves would be set if we could get Matt Kemp, Jose Reyes, and Albert Pujols.
by willlinn on May 17, 2011 2:13 PM EDT
I never once said Rose was as patient a hitter as Chipper. I actually believe that Chipper would still come out ahead of Rose OBP if he kept playing too. I even said that Chipper OBP would be “closer to Rose OBP than the .402 mark now.” I was just making the case that Jones OBP looks wildly ahead of Rose now, which it is, but it WOULDN’T be if Chipper kept playing.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
I just want to say that this is no slight against Chipper. Chipper is my all time favorite sports player period. I have been lucky to have seen this guy play as long as I have, and will miss him when he retires. I hope he stays with the Braves until end of 2013 honestly, because what he brings to a team is priceless. I hope that one day after he retires he would take over as manager of the Atlanta Braves, I think he could handle it, and help with players in the batting cage as well.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
Chipper has better numbers
across the board than Rose. Chipper has a higher AVG, so Rose having more hits means nothing, other than he played longer.
Chipper blows him away in OBP and SLG, and is slightly better in AVG.
The two aren’t even comparable.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 24, 2011 12:50 AM EST up reply actions
He has a higher AVG now, but will he if he plays the same years? Probably not. Having the all time hits is extremely important, you always talk about how important getting on base is(and you are 110% right), Rose happened to get on base more times because of getting hits than anyone in the history of the game. That is extremely important to remember. Your statement is ludacris saying having more hits mean nothing, other than he played longer. He was healthy enough and good enough to play longer, he shouldn’t apologize for that.
Of course Chipper blows him away in SLG, the guy was more of a power hitter, wayyyyy more of a power hitter in fact. Same with OPS, Chipper is going to own Rose in those categories. You can’t compare the two with this. ANd Chipper is better with OBP by a lot now, but point is he won’t be if he played the same amount of years, which hurt Rose some in that category.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
If Rose had a higher average, then having more hits would mean something.
He and Chipper have almost the exact AVG, which means only that Rose had more opportunities.
If I get 1 hit per year, but I play 8,000 years, is having the most hits an accomplishment?
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 24, 2011 1:32 AM EST up reply actions
“If Rose had a higher average, then having more hits would mean something.”
Really??? You really wanna start saying how AVG is the be all end all stat, and that since Rose didn’t have a lifetime .380 AVG that his hits record is meaningless? Really? That’s dumb, but moving on…
“If I get 1 hit per year, but I play 8,000 years, is having the most hits an accomplishment?”
Again, very stupid analogy. That absolutely makes no sense at all, wow is all I can say to that statement…
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
I don’t even know where to begin here.
You are whiffing completely on both counts.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 24, 2011 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
uh huh
Chipper AVG wouldn’t even be as high as Rose if Chipper keeps playing. Basically you’re saying having the most hits means nothing because he had the most PA’s. So, you are punishing him for this, ok, stupid analogy but ok, whatever floats your boat.
And saying, "If I get 1 hit per year, but I play 8,000 years, is having the most hits an accomplishment?"
That is one of if not the most retarded analogy that I have seen on Talking Chop. Congrats on that, that is hard to do, with as many posters that TC has. I wish I could respond more to your great insight, but gotta leave for the weekend, but go ahead and get the last word on more insightful analogy that you have.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
I'm not "punishing" Rose for anything
I’m saying that Rose having more career hits than Chipper is not as impressive as Chipper having higher rate stats in every category than Rose. It certainly doesn’t indicate that Rose is a better hitters.
Also, I’m not sure I drew any analogies to speak of…I simply used math to support my idea that being the all-time hits leader is not an automatic pass to being a better hitter than someone else – especially when that someone else is a better hitter in literally every aspect of the game.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 25, 2011 4:53 PM EST up reply actions
Well, it raises the question of how long do you have to be good in order to be considered a HoF-type player. Of course, that can depend on how good you were when you were good. Consider two extremes — Sandy Koufax, and Don Sutton (or maybe Bert Blyleven). Koufax was a world-beater for a short period of time. Sutton was very good for a long time. Both are in the Hall. Dale Murphy, who was very good for about five years, isn’t.
"Some people give their bodies to science. I gave mine to baseball." -- Ron Hunt
I'm almost convinced
that HOF voting is about as dependable as Gold Glove voting.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 25, 2011 11:21 PM EST up reply actions
You won't get an argument from me
Especially when it comes to the Veterans’ Committee.
"Some people give their bodies to science. I gave mine to baseball." -- Ron Hunt
I'll give Rose this
He played a lot of his career during the era where most stadiums had artificial turf, and a lot of it wasn’t very good turf. A lot of guys of the era (e.g., Andre Dawson) broke down playing on that stuff. So give Rose some props for staying good enough long enough to rack up those career numbers.
"Some people give their bodies to science. I gave mine to baseball." -- Ron Hunt
Chipper Jones from ages 23-39: .304/.402/.532/.934, 2613 hits, 525 doubles, 454 homers, 1561 RBI, 149 stolen bases, 1454 walks, 1559 runs.
Pete Roes from ages 23-39: .312/.382/.431/.813, 3387 hits, 629 doubles, 149 homers, 1036 RBI, 154 stolen bases, 1191 walks, 1741 runs.
Rose had him on hits, doubles, runs, and stolen bases, though those were essentially the same. Chipper had him on homers, RBI, and walks. They were different players, but even so, Chipper got on base better and drove the ball better. Chipper was the more productive player.
Ask yourself this: If you could pick on in his prime, which would you take?
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it:
http://www.amazon.com/Four-C-B-Wilkins/dp/1449578454/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257720610&sr=1-1
www.dropoutproductions.com
I’d pick Chipper, but I’m biased and I saw Chipper actually play in his prime, and he is my favorite player ever. I also think Chipper is a better overall person, that’s just my thinking though. Even though I am biased, I still think Rose was the better switch hitter. Not gonna convince me otherwise.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
We've left the land of logical and quantifiable arguments, then
if you can’t be convinced otherwise.
Most people use statistics the way a drunk would use a lamppost—for support, and not for illumination.
www.duwanis.com
I still think Rose was the better switch hitter.
I don’t understand how that’s possible given mountains of statistical evidence against it.
I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it:
http://www.amazon.com/Four-C-B-Wilkins/dp/1449578454/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257720610&sr=1-1
www.dropoutproductions.com
What mountains of evidence? The SLG, HR, OPS? Different type of player, of course Chipper was better in that area, never refuted this. Chipper is more of a patient hitter, but if Chipper plays as long as Rose did, then that OBP would get closer and closer to Rose and not be as big as it looks now. Rose was healthier and got more hits, Chipper is towards his end(hopefully can play 2 more years), and had more power. But if you think there is mountains of evidence, then no reason to continue this convo, because neither opinions will be altered at this point.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
Chipper would have to average a .294 OBP for the next 6 years to end up with the same OBP as Pete Rose over the same time period. That’s not going to happen.
But that’s really moot, because we don’t have to compare careers; if you look at what they did over the same time period at the same age, Chipper is clearly a better hitter across the board. If you want to award Rose for the fact that he’s played longer, then he should be higher than Mantle, too – it’s not like Mantle has the most hits, and he only played for 18 years as opposed to Pete’s 24.
Most people use statistics the way a drunk would use a lamppost—for support, and not for illumination.
www.duwanis.com
ughhh
I don’t think you even read one word of what I said. If you did, then you just didn’t follow what I was saying. I said early on that Chipper was more of a patient hitter than Rose, also said that even if Chipper plays as long as Rose did, then Chipper would STILL have a better OBP. I just said that right now Chipper’s OBP looks superior now, it won’t look near as superior if he continues to play.
I’m not awarding Rose specifically for playing 24 years. That is a great accomplishment playing that long, most couldn’t physically do it. I won’t punish him like some do and say it is almost meaningless what he did based on him having a long career. Just stop, Mantle is the best switch hitter of all time, no reason for me or anyone else to think otherwise. I’m entitled to my opinion, doesn’t make it wrong, neither does anyone else’s.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
I read, and understood, everything you said
My point was that Chipper would have to fail spectacularly at the plate for his OBP to not look “near as superior” as it does now.
You are entitled to your opinion, certainly, and I don’t begrudge you that. But you’re claiming your opinion isn’t incongruent with the statistics, which is false.
I don’t always find things on TC exciting and gripping, but when they are, I prefer: Duwanis
by Santaklose11 on Dec 2, 2011 6:08 PM EST
Rose also put up two seasons where he put up negative WAR, which hurt him. I don’t think there is a doubt that if Chipper played that long that he would put up negative WAR numbers, because I don’t think Chipper could physically play and produce. Obviously, I don’t have any proof either way about Chipper’s future, but this is only logical to believe this.
I think Chipper’s OBP would be around .383-.390 if Chipper keeps playing, which certainly isn’t nearly as superior. Sure, it’s better, but not like it is looking right now. I can’t sit here and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt to anyone that Rose was a better switch hitter, just like nobody can say Chipper was. It is only our opinions, one got a lot more hits, the other hit a lot more homers.
I’m not wrong in my thinking to believe that Rose was a better switch hitter, just like you and other Braves fans aren’t wrong in your thinking about Chipper is better. If you and others want to think it, then so be it. As I stated before, Chipper is my favorite player ever, and I would rather have him than Rose if I had to pick between the two. There is no slight against Chipper here, not like I think Rose was a God and Chipper was some schmuck player. That is far from the truth.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
You forgot the part where Chipper has a higher average than Rose too. But, that wouldn’t support your argument, so I understand why you aren’t mentioning it.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 25, 2011 4:53 PM EST up reply actions
And the fact that Chipper AVG is only 1 point better than Rose’s and having played less years doesn’t lead you to believe that if Chipper would play the same amount of years that Chipper AVG wouldn’t be better? It’s not even up for discussion, if Chipper plays as long as Rose did, that AVG would be down, prolly in the .290’s for his career. Rose had 2 negative WAR years in his 40’s, of course that hurt his career numbers some. But hey think what you want.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
You are doing a poor job of presenting your argument.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Dec 4, 2011 5:20 PM EST up reply actions
Me???
lol, that’s a good one. You routinely do a poor job of presenting your arguments. Just funny you saying this. ;)
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
Seriously, man
Stop. You’re truly presenting a poor argument on this one. Take a mulligan and come back stronger. Hammering this until death does nothing for getting any future posts read, for sure.
Hey! I’m new.
by ChopMaster on Jul 7, 2011 10:24 PM CDT (joined Jul 19, 2010)
Twitter: @biggentleben
ehhh, I don’t care if any of my posts get read or not, if they do great, if not, fine as well. People still read Justins posts after all the stuff he has said in the past, and if people don’t read anymore of my posts cause of these few posts from me, then so be it. I’m not here to be popular, if I want to be popular I would have thousands more posts right now. I type what is on my mind, and what I think about the Braves moves, future moves or whatever Braves.
I’m done with the Rose vs Chipper discussion, this is afterall a Braves blog, so not surprised to see most jump all over me on this one. Again, I can careless about this discussion, I would take Chipper if I had a choice based on what I have said throughout this thread. This isn’t even a big deal. I don’t think anything I have said represnts a poor argument, but again I can careless if you and others think it is.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
lol @ hits making rose a better player
so you’re a better player for continuing to play well past your prime?
Lol, just look at the Kid’s avg, Slick. - Chief Noc-A-Homa
Follow me on Twitter: @hashtagbaseball
Rose had a lot more hits, Chipper had a lot more homers. lol @ homers making Chipper a better player…
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
Chipper is the better player because he has a higher batting average, a higher OBP, and a higher SLG. He was also a better defender at 3B.
the only thing Rose has on Chipper is counting stats, by virtue of playing for a very long time, which is a positive attribute and should be celebrated.
Chipper is not the better player because he has more HR, he has more HR because he is the better player, by virtue of every metric possible.
"No. Lonely people mixing with one another? Breeding? Creating an even lonelier generation? You're not even allowing natural selection do its work. Pssh. You're like the guy who invented the seat belt."
Dwight Schrute
Boom. Lawyered.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Dec 5, 2011 6:55 PM EST up reply actions
If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.
If we can land [Stephen Drew], I will give FW a bj.
~justincredubil02
by king of games on Dec 6, 2011 10:34 AM EST up reply actions
hits > slugging, yall
even when your OBP is worse!
Lol, just look at the Kid’s avg, Slick. - Chief Noc-A-Homa
Follow me on Twitter: @hashtagbaseball
Right now, ya Chipper is superior to Rose in OBP, never argued differently(you prolly didn’t read though, so I don’t expect much), my point is Chipper is towards his end now, if he played the same amount of years as Rose, you will certainly see that OBP slip I think quite a bit. Again, Chipper is still going to have a better OBP, but not as superior as it looks at this moment.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
I got to see both Chipper and Rose in their primes, and I think that adjusting for park and era differences, Chipper still comes out ahead on power. other than that, they were pretty similar. Rose may have had better speed, although my perception of that might be influenced by several things that were different in the ‘70s. Rose was still a hell of a player in his prime, and he was a very good player for quite a long time. And don’t forget, he was the last player-manager.
"Some people give their bodies to science. I gave mine to baseball." -- Ron Hunt
Did you seriously just use the rapper Ludacris as an adjective? You do know that his name is a pun, and not the way you actually spell ludicrous right?
it is a quality v. quantity issue. Rose played for 24 seasons and in addition to hits, is also the all-time leader in PAs by a wide margin. Rose was amazing, I agree, but no way is he higher than 4th on my list.
Can’t fault him for being all-time leader in PA’s by a wide margin. He was healthy and had a long lasting career. No reason for punishing him for this. Bottom line is he is still the all time hits king, can’t ever taint that. I disagree about Rose being 4th, but fair enough since it’s just our opinions, and you are def entitled to have your list whatever way you want. I would never put Jones or anyone other than Mantle ahead of Rose as all time switch hitter, but that’s just me.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
agree its entirely a matter of personal opinion, but ...
Number of hits and number of plate appearances largely relate to length of career, which in turn largely relate to fortuity – genetics and the absence of serious injury – which allow the given player to not only continue to play, but remain productive for years beyond to the norm. (Rose is also #1 in games played by a wide margin.)
Basically, if “counting stats” are the measure, players like Ted Williams – who lost years off his unbelievable career due to military service – and Mantle and Jones – who lost disportionate amounts of time due to injuries – are unfairly penalized in my opinion.
Sure, if it wasn’t for Rose longevity, he wouldn’t have been able to be the all time hit leader. You can say the same about Hank Aaron as the all time home run leader(yes yes yes, I know Bonds owns it, but he is a sham, Aaron is the true home run leader). Jeter has 3,000+ hits because of longevity and being healthy. He will now go to the HOF. Jim Thome has 600+ homers because of longevity, he will go to the HOF too. What is your point about longevity? Obviously the longer you can stay healthy and produce, the more hits or homers or whatever will improve. Some are great for 10 years, then bam, can’t play at that level anymore.
Chipper has still played a lot, teams can only dream of having a superstar like Chipper and that would be great for as long as he has been. Obviously last few years injuries have hurt him, but that is sports. Can’t take anything away from Rose for staying healthy and having a long career, he made the most out of it and is the all time hit leader, that will likely never be broken.
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
For what it is worth, Chipper has been worth 7 more WAR over 6 less seasons….so unless you think Chipper would decline to the point where he was producing negative WAR seasons, Chipper should really be considered the better player…
He is the hit leader and that is great, but Chipper was so much better in every offensive category its hard to understand how Chipper could be considered worse than Rose (of course there is a difference in era and maybe that is affecting both player’s numbers).
You may have the right to your opinion, but I have the right to prove your opinion wrong ;) (said completely in jest).
"No. Lonely people mixing with one another? Breeding? Creating an even lonelier generation? You're not even allowing natural selection do its work. Pssh. You're like the guy who invented the seat belt."
Dwight Schrute
Fangraphs has Chipper WAR at 87.5 and Rose at 91.4 for his career. I guess we just use different sites, which it’s fine. Rose in his 40’s did have two negative WAR seasons(combined to be 2.5 worth of WAR lost). I honestly think if Chipper played long enough, you would see same for Chipper, again just my opinion. ;)
I don’t care if Constanza hit .500 with 30 HRs and 150 RBI in 3 weeks, benching Heyward was a stupid decision.
by justincredubil02 on Oct 24, 2011 9:55 AM EDT
and i usually use fangraphs, but for some reason i didnt check there this time, i forgot that fangraphs has historical data too.
"No. Lonely people mixing with one another? Breeding? Creating an even lonelier generation? You're not even allowing natural selection do its work. Pssh. You're like the guy who invented the seat belt."
Dwight Schrute
No I didn't
and I don’t even think it’s close.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 24, 2011 12:48 AM EST up reply actions
and those "intangibles" are worth?
by JoelGuzman'sScout on Nov 23, 2011 12:51 AM EST up reply actions
Are you asking to quantify intangibles?
Cause that would make them tangibles.
"I have a dream that our twelve pitchers will one day play in a city where they will not be judged solely by statistics, but on the quality and consistency of their pitches." - MLK, Jr.
by someguy1 on Nov 23, 2011 9:41 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
exactly
"I have a dream that our twelve pitchers will one day play in a city where they will not be judged solely by statistics, but on the quality and consistency of their pitches." - MLK, Jr.
thanks for reaffiring my point.
again.
by JoelGuzman'sScout on Nov 26, 2011 8:16 AM EST up reply actions
This fanpost asks hypothetically whether Chipper Jones would be wanted on the team in 2012 at any cost. The fact of the matter is, of course, that Chipper happens to be under contract for next season and plans to return and play out his contract.
I believe the Braves will be a better team because of his presence and one of the primary reasons why this will be true is the so-called “intangibles” he brings to the team, the relative value of which are admittedly incapable of precise quantification.
I think it’s more his knowledge than his intangibles. It certainly isn’t anything like “heart” or “grit” that so often get exaggerated when discussing intangibles.
Chipper’s intangibles is his amazing knowledge of the game that he imparts to others. He’s the one who helped Uggla out of his funk. He’s the one who’s helped McCann over the years. He just gets it and knows how to fix things.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 23, 2011 8:11 AM EST up reply actions
Which is why I really wish he'll consider being a coach of some kind when he retires.
Dunno if he would or not, but he could help this team even if he was confined to a wheelchair.
Most people use statistics the way a drunk would use a lamppost—for support, and not for illumination.
www.duwanis.com
obligatory
No wonder nobody likes you, Tuttle... everything's a (Pujols) damn debate.
by royhobbs on Nov 23, 2011 10:15 AM EST up reply actions 3 recs
If you can dodge a wrench you can dodge a hungry Prince Fielder at Popeyes.
by Scott Coleman on Nov 23, 2011 1:42 PM EST up reply actions
but Chipper can't dodge a #$%#ing wrench
heck, he can’t dodge a Hooster waitress.
by JoelGuzman'sScout on Nov 23, 2011 3:34 PM EST up reply actions
Hooster?
Hey! I’m new.
by ChopMaster on Jul 7, 2011 10:24 PM CDT (joined Jul 19, 2010)
Twitter: @biggentleben
by biggentleben on Nov 23, 2011 6:52 PM EST up reply actions
There is some serious
subject/verb disagreement going on here.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 23, 2011 8:24 AM EST up reply actions
there is only one subject/verb disagreement, because there is only one subject and one verb
"No. Lonely people mixing with one another? Breeding? Creating an even lonelier generation? You're not even allowing natural selection do its work. Pssh. You're like the guy who invented the seat belt."
Dwight Schrute
I didn’t say there was a lot – just that it was a serious situation.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 24, 2011 12:52 AM EST up reply actions
You're parsing over semantics.
If not actively shared, his “knowledge” is essentially meaningless in terms of influencing or impacting teammates in any way. And why would Chipper, but not some other statistically excellent player (say, for example, Manny Ramirez), choose to actively share with and try to help teammates other than perhaps the quality of his character, his leadership attributes, his desire to win? And what exactly is it that constitutes “heart” or “grit” other than positive attributes such as determination, hard word, resilance, and consistency, all of which teammates – particularly in the context of having the rare privilege of playing with an obvious HOFer – might be likely to perceive, internalize, emulate or otherwise try to apply to themselves on a daily basis?
The important point that I’m trying to make is that the impact of a Chipper Jones simply cannot be measured; and that this is because group dynamics and team performance over an an almost nine month championship drive are not such simple things.
Chipper's value as a leader on the Braves has been pretty consistent,
as Justin points out. Your example of Manny Ramirez works perfectly. Leaders of Chipper’s caliber are just as rare as talents of Manny’s caliber. The combination of leadership and talent at the level that Chipper has displayed throughout his career is exceedingly rare, making it a no-brainer to pay him $13M+ to ‘re-sign’ (at least from the Braves’ perspective, for a different team I’m not so sure).
I don’t feel like the Braves are doing a favor for a veteran fan favorite. Chip is worth every penny of that $13M.
"I have a dream that our twelve pitchers will one day play in a city where they will not be judged solely by statistics, but on the quality and consistency of their pitches." - MLK, Jr.
You're kind of right
but I also think there’s merit in differentiating between a guy whose chief intangible benefit is his mastery of the sport, as opposed to the people that we usually talk about having “great intangibles” whose strengths lie more in “clubhouse manner” and “determination” and other such character traits.
Most people use statistics the way a drunk would use a lamppost—for support, and not for illumination.
www.duwanis.com
This
Most guys that we consider to have intangibles are considered as such because they lack skill. David Eckstein is the perfect example.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 24, 2011 12:54 AM EST up reply actions
Of course, I disagree.
Chipper is the excellent example. In addition to great skills and performing at a superior level throughout his career, he has excellent personal attributes (“intangibles”) that have been and remain highly beneficial to teammates and the team generally.
There is no mutual exclusivity between skills and intangibles.
by fandave on Nov 24, 2011 2:48 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Chipper
has never been recognized as a guy who gives it his all, who goes 110%, etc.
It wasn’t until recent years that he has emerged as a leader.
If Chipper Jones were not one of the greatest hitters of all time, we wouldn’t care anything about keeping him.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 24, 2011 3:15 PM EST up reply actions
Well, that's kind of like saying...
… that if [pick your favorite President] had never won an elected office, we wouldn’t care anything about him. As far as Chipper not being a leader, I will point out that up until about five years ago, there were always players around who had more experience than Chipper, or more time with the club — guys like Glavine, Smoltz, Greg Olsen, Eddie Perez, Brian Jordan, etc.
"Some people give their bodies to science. I gave mine to baseball." -- Ron Hunt
If Chipper Jones was [note correct tense please] a league average 3B, he would have been done years ago.
You forgot a comma after “tense”…
And yes – he would have been done years ago, despite his intangibles. That’s my point.
My dad taught me how to make meat for sloppy joes and my mom let me turn over hot dogs on the grill.
by ChopMaster on Jun 25, 2011 7:25 PM CDT
by justincredubil02 on Nov 24, 2011 11:36 PM EST up reply actions
The question asked would be moot.
If Chipper did not have a contract and were a free agent, he would likely retire.
Unquestionably, I resign him.
Face of the franchise for nearly 2 decades, and in my mind, you repay loyalty with loyalty. How many trades/FA came about because Chipper left money on the table? And he’s still productive for his age. Not like he’s some schlub putting up a sub .500 OPS.
"Jason Heyward was a Greek philosopher reincarnated as a baseball player." - Don Sutton
I’m generally opposed to the idea that a veteran should get paid for what he did years ago, and mercifully that idea seems to be disappearing from baseball. But yes, there is something to be said for organizational loyalty, especially if you entertain the idea that the guy will stay with the organization after his playing days are over, which the Braves clearly do with Chipper. And, there is something to be said for keeping a guy on the roster because his presence brings more fans to the ballpark. (That’s an aspect of moneyball that I haven’t seen anything written about…)
And anyway, we’re not dealing with a Dale Murphy situation here, where the player’s skills suddenly went all to hell. Chipper’s skills are still very good; it’s mainly health issues that are holding him back. I presume that the Braves have insurance on him, so as long as he’s still a productive player, why not hang on to him? Now, some guys know when it’s time to hang it up, and some don’t. In the latter case, sometimes the organization has to break the guy’s heart, in order to keep him from embarrassing himself. (Case in point: Glavine.) Chipper seems to know what his plan is. We’ll see.
"Some people give their bodies to science. I gave mine to baseball." -- Ron Hunt
OT- Didn't know where else to post this...
But why was the post about the Native American team names taken down? Just curious.
by Kitch on Nov 26, 2011 8:46 AM EST via mobile reply actions
Because it's political
which is verboten.
If I had to guess anyway. Not like I’m a moderator.
Most people use statistics the way a drunk would use a lamppost—for support, and not for illumination.
www.duwanis.com
Makes sense
I just wasn’t sure because I knew we had the story earlier this year about equal rights for the gay community in sports, and that seemed political in nature too. Not giving my opinion on either matter… just wasn’t sure if the comments had gotten out of hand or something.
by Kitch on Nov 26, 2011 9:23 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
If I recall, that was in the FanShot area, not the FanPost area.
Hey! I’m new.
by ChopMaster on Jul 7, 2011 10:24 PM CDT (joined Jul 19, 2010)
Twitter: @biggentleben
by biggentleben on Nov 26, 2011 11:59 AM EST up reply actions
is there some sort of distinction there, political debate isn’t allowed anywhere on the site.
I don’t care either way I just don’t want people getting the wrogn idea that political speech is ok anywhere on the site, (if that is in fact the stance)
"No. Lonely people mixing with one another? Breeding? Creating an even lonelier generation? You're not even allowing natural selection do its work. Pssh. You're like the guy who invented the seat belt."
Dwight Schrute
No, not really
It’s just the approach. I’m not sure that there’s any political stuff supposed to get through, but it’s all about the approach. The approach of the FanPost in question was to attack teams with Native names and stir up controversy on the board. The post discussing homosexuals and sports (and I can’t even remember the whole of what the FanShot was even focused on within the topic) was very much attempting to foster healthy discussion. There’s a major difference there.
Hey! I’m new.
by ChopMaster on Jul 7, 2011 10:24 PM CDT (joined Jul 19, 2010)
Twitter: @biggentleben
by biggentleben on Nov 26, 2011 10:29 PM EST up reply actions
The only one “stirring up controversy” in the thread was you.
For what its worth, I deleted the post myself.
Freeman isn’t on Heyward’s level in terms of tools, skills, or baseball IQ–but it’s fair to say Freeman has failed to meet the modest expectations in place for him - Capitol Avenue Club (May 28th, 2011)
LOL
If I’m going to discuss the weather in Georgia, I research what I’m talking about before making a fool of myself. Your research on tribes and their opinion on the topic (the only voice that matters in the argument, btw) left much to be desired.
Hey! I’m new.
by ChopMaster on Jul 7, 2011 10:24 PM CDT (joined Jul 19, 2010)
Twitter: @biggentleben
by biggentleben on Nov 27, 2011 4:31 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Roy Oswalt doesn’t need to save the Rangers, he only needs to provide insurance and depth
- James Loney: Umpires should call pitches from behind mound — and be robots with replay
- Magglio Ordonez set to retire after 15 seasons
- Barry Bonds thinks it will be ‘very sad’ if he doesn’t get into the Hall on his first try
- Chris Johnson’s glove webbing had a Spidey sense at Coors Field — for one play, at least
