June 13, 200818 yr funny...you ask for "PM", and then edit your post, to tell me you didn't say any of what I wrote (which basically, you did, but it's ok)... "But if he was better in the post season, and Hoffman was better in the other 1000 innings, it wouldn't be so clear cut." (That would be your quote...)...an assumption. The fact the statement even says "if" and then you comeback with "1000" (lots of innings), shows you it is not a fact, which makes it pointless...considering you only dish out the "facts." "Not because I want to be like "Haha, you're wrong, I'm right", but because when I am wrong about facts, I rather be corrected than stay wrong. I just assume everyone else is the same way. The rest of our conflicts come from defensiveness." (another one of your quotes) Which regarding Hoffman/Rivera, you're not giving me "facts" with your statement up top, but more of an assumption, with the whole "if Hoffman had the chance to do this, and did it" factor... Rabb can correct me if Im wrong here (he'll do it anyways)... I did say that it was a big part of why he is considered better. But if he was better in the post season, and Hoffman was better in the other 1000 innings, it wouldn't be so clear cut. But I'm pretty sure the only point he was making with that statement was in regards to overall value of a player. He wasn't claiming fact inasmuch as he was saying someone dominant in the post-season and great in the regular season wouldn't necessarily be viewed more favorably than someone dominant in the regular-season and geat in the post-season. The fact of the matter is, and the reason you're catching a lot of crap with this, is that you cannot judge a player based on 1-2 weeks worth of performance... Wagner, 10 IP, Hoffman 13 IP. A-Rod is the perfect microcosm why actually... Year Round Tm Opp WLser G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG SB CS SH SF HBP +------+-----+---+---+-----+---+---+---+---+--+--+--+---+---+---+-----+-----+-----+---+--+---+---+---+ 1995 ALDS SEA NYY W 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 .000 0 0 0 0 0 ALCS SEA CLE L 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 .000 .000 .000 0 0 0 0 0 1997 ALDS SEA BAL L 4 16 1 5 1 0 1 1 0 5 .313 .313 .563 0 0 0 0 0 2000 ALDS SEA CHW W 3 13 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 2 .308 .308 .308 0 1 1 0 0 ALCS SEA NYY L 6 22 4 9 2 0 2 5 3 8 .409 .480 .773 1 0 0 0 0 2004 ALDS NYY MIN W 4 19 3 8 3 0 1 3 2 1 .421 .476 .737 2 1 0 0 0 ALCS NYY BOS L 7 31 8 8 2 0 2 5 4 6 .258 .378 .516 0 0 0 0 2 2005 ALDS NYY LAA L 5 15 2 2 1 0 0 0 6 5 .133 .381 .200 1 1 2006 ALDS NYY DET L 4 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 .071 .071 .071 0 0 2007 ALDS NYY CLE L 4 15 2 4 0 0 1 1 2 6 .267 .353 .467 0 0 0 0 0 Really awesome some post seasons... heck look at 2004 for that "Can't be clutch in the playoffs theory" to look like foolishness... it's one nine game span in 2005-2006 that really skews his numbers... Now, Hoffman and Wagner haven't been able to produce much more than a week, but I'm willing to be anything, give their performance and talent, if they had almost two seasons worth of bullpen stats, they wouldn't be flashing ERAs in the 4s, 5s or 6s... Also, you called out Hoffman for blowing some games late last year... you're talking about a 39 year-old change-up specialist who's starting his natural regression. Just like Mo Rivera last year, with his 3+ ERA. I'm sure he'll probably come back and it'll sit more in the 2.5 range at the end of the season, but that's still above his career numbers. Summary: Using small sample-sizes (no mattter where you pull them from) is foolish, because, given the nature of baseball, a guy can be Babe Ruth/Bob Gibson one second and be Mario Mendoza/Brian Moehler the next. Just because it's the post-season doesn't mean small sample size doesn't apply and that you can call some guys clutch and chokers. That, and really, the Yankees (I've found) are the best players to make post-season judgements on, because they have a crap load of games in the playoffs :o
June 13, 200818 yr funny...you ask for "PM", and then edit your post, to tell me you didn't say any of what I wrote (which basically, you did, but it's ok)... "But if he was better in the post season, and Hoffman was better in the other 1000 innings, it wouldn't be so clear cut." (That would be your quote...)...an assumption. The fact the statement even says "if" and then you comeback with "1000" (lots of innings), shows you it is not a fact, which makes it pointless...considering you only dish out the "facts." "Not because I want to be like "Haha, you're wrong, I'm right", but because when I am wrong about facts, I rather be corrected than stay wrong. I just assume everyone else is the same way. The rest of our conflicts come from defensiveness." (another one of your quotes) Which regarding Hoffman/Rivera, you're not giving me "facts" with your statement up top, but more of an assumption, with the whole "if Hoffman had the chance to do this, and did it" factor... Rabb can correct me if Im wrong here (he'll do it anyways)... I did say that it was a big part of why he is considered better. But if he was better in the post season, and Hoffman was better in the other 1000 innings, it wouldn't be so clear cut. But I'm pretty sure the only point he was making with that statement was in regards to overall value of a player. He wasn't claiming fact inasmuch as he was saying someone dominant in the post-season and great in the regular season wouldn't necessarily be viewed more favorably than someone dominant in the regular-season and geat in the post-season. The fact of the matter is, and the reason you're catching a lot of crap with this, is that you cannot judge a player based on 1-2 weeks worth of performance... Wagner, 10 IP, Hoffman 13 IP. A-Rod is the perfect microcosm why actually... Year Round Tm Opp WLser G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG SB CS SH SF HBP +------+-----+---+---+-----+---+---+---+---+--+--+--+---+---+---+-----+-----+-----+---+--+---+---+---+ 1995 ALDS SEA NYY W 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 .000 0 0 0 0 0 ALCS SEA CLE L 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 .000 .000 .000 0 0 0 0 0 1997 ALDS SEA BAL L 4 16 1 5 1 0 1 1 0 5 .313 .313 .563 0 0 0 0 0 2000 ALDS SEA CHW W 3 13 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 2 .308 .308 .308 0 1 1 0 0 ALCS SEA NYY L 6 22 4 9 2 0 2 5 3 8 .409 .480 .773 1 0 0 0 0 2004 ALDS NYY MIN W 4 19 3 8 3 0 1 3 2 1 .421 .476 .737 2 1 0 0 0 ALCS NYY BOS L 7 31 8 8 2 0 2 5 4 6 .258 .378 .516 0 0 0 0 2 2005 ALDS NYY LAA L 5 15 2 2 1 0 0 0 6 5 .133 .381 .200 1 1 2006 ALDS NYY DET L 4 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 .071 .071 .071 0 0 2007 ALDS NYY CLE L 4 15 2 4 0 0 1 1 2 6 .267 .353 .467 0 0 0 0 0 Really awesome some post seasons... heck look at 2004 for that "Can't be clutch in the playoffs theory" to look like foolishness... it's one ten game span in 2005-2006 that really skews his numbers... Now, Hoffman and Wagner haven't been able to produce much more than a week, but I'm willing to be anything, give their performance and talent, if they had almost two seasons worth of bullpen stats, they wouldn't be flashing ERAs in the 4s, 5s or 6s... Also, you called out Hoffman for blowing some games late last year... you're talking about a 39 year-old change-up specialist who's starting his natural regression. Just like Mo Rivera last year, with his 3+ ERA. I'm sure he'll probably come back and it'll sit more in the 2.5 range at the end of the season, but that's still above his career numbers. Summary: Using small sample-sizes (no mattter where you pull them from) is foolish, because, given the nature of baseball, a guy can be Babe Ruth/Bob Gibson one second and be Mario Mendoza/Brian Moehler the next. Just because it's the post-season doesn't mean small sample size doesn't apply and that you can call some guys clutch and chokers. That, and really, the Yankees (I've found) are the best players to make post-season judgements on, because they have a crap load of games in the playoffs :o Bingo, now I don't have to type that. Awesome.
June 13, 200818 yr funny...you ask for "PM", and then edit your post, to tell me you didn't say any of what I wrote (which basically, you did, but it's ok)... "But if he was better in the post season, and Hoffman was better in the other 1000 innings, it wouldn't be so clear cut." (That would be your quote...)...an assumption. The fact the statement even says "if" and then you comeback with "1000" (lots of innings), shows you it is not a fact, which makes it pointless...considering you only dish out the "facts." "Not because I want to be like "Haha, you're wrong, I'm right", but because when I am wrong about facts, I rather be corrected than stay wrong. I just assume everyone else is the same way. The rest of our conflicts come from defensiveness." (another one of your quotes) Which regarding Hoffman/Rivera, you're not giving me "facts" with your statement up top, but more of an assumption, with the whole "if Hoffman had the chance to do this, and did it" factor... Rabb can correct me if Im wrong here (he'll do it anyways)... I did say that it was a big part of why he is considered better. But if he was better in the post season, and Hoffman was better in the other 1000 innings, it wouldn't be so clear cut. But I'm pretty sure the only point he was making with that statement was in regards to overall value of a player. He wasn't claiming fact inasmuch as he was saying someone dominant in the post-season and great in the regular season wouldn't necessarily be viewed more favorably than someone dominant in the regular-season and geat in the post-season. The fact of the matter is, and the reason you're catching a lot of crap with this, is that you cannot judge a player based on 1-2 weeks worth of performance... Wagner, 10 IP, Hoffman 13 IP. A-Rod is the perfect microcosm why actually... Year Round Tm Opp WLser G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG SB CS SH SF HBP +------+-----+---+---+-----+---+---+---+---+--+--+--+---+---+---+-----+-----+-----+---+--+---+---+---+ 1995 ALDS SEA NYY W 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 .000 0 0 0 0 0 ALCS SEA CLE L 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 .000 .000 .000 0 0 0 0 0 1997 ALDS SEA BAL L 4 16 1 5 1 0 1 1 0 5 .313 .313 .563 0 0 0 0 0 2000 ALDS SEA CHW W 3 13 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 2 .308 .308 .308 0 1 1 0 0 ALCS SEA NYY L 6 22 4 9 2 0 2 5 3 8 .409 .480 .773 1 0 0 0 0 2004 ALDS NYY MIN W 4 19 3 8 3 0 1 3 2 1 .421 .476 .737 2 1 0 0 0 ALCS NYY BOS L 7 31 8 8 2 0 2 5 4 6 .258 .378 .516 0 0 0 0 2 2005 ALDS NYY LAA L 5 15 2 2 1 0 0 0 6 5 .133 .381 .200 1 1 2006 ALDS NYY DET L 4 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 .071 .071 .071 0 0 2007 ALDS NYY CLE L 4 15 2 4 0 0 1 1 2 6 .267 .353 .467 0 0 0 0 0 Really awesome some post seasons... heck look at 2004 for that "Can't be clutch in the playoffs theory" to look like foolishness... it's one nine game span in 2005-2006 that really skews his numbers... Now, Hoffman and Wagner haven't been able to produce much more than a week, but I'm willing to be anything, give their performance and talent, if they had almost two seasons worth of bullpen stats, they wouldn't be flashing ERAs in the 4s, 5s or 6s... Also, you called out Hoffman for blowing some games late last year... you're talking about a 39 year-old change-up specialist who's starting his natural regression. Just like Mo Rivera last year, with his 3+ ERA. I'm sure he'll probably come back and it'll sit more in the 2.5 range at the end of the season, but that's still above his career numbers. Summary: Using small sample-sizes (no mattter where you pull them from) is foolish, because, given the nature of baseball, a guy can be Babe Ruth/Bob Gibson one second and be Mario Mendoza/Brian Moehler the next. Just because it's the post-season doesn't mean small sample size doesn't apply and that you can call some guys clutch and chokers. That, and really, the Yankees (I've found) are the best players to make post-season judgements on, because they have a crap load of games in the playoffs :o That is your opinion though... obviously, a guy who's done great in the regular season as opposed to the guy who's only done great in the postseason...the regular season guy will come out on top. The thing is though...when you're comparing 2 guys who have both been great regular season closers (like Rivera and Hoffman, for example) people are always going to look at their postseason #'s to say..."that's the reason I want Mariano closing Game 7 of the World Series." "THAT's the reason why Mariano is better." This is common...just look at Kobe Bryant in the NBA, and his Michael Jordan comparisons. All of the sudden, he's getting bashed some, b/c fact is, his #'s in the NBA Finals are really below his career averages. It's common for sports athletes...and you gotta admit...there's more pressure come playoff time, than there is in the regular season knowing it's just 1 Game of 162 (and if you don't win, "get 'em tomorrow"), everytime you go out there.
June 13, 200818 yr funny...you ask for "PM", and then edit your post, to tell me you didn't say any of what I wrote (which basically, you did, but it's ok)... "But if he was better in the post season, and Hoffman was better in the other 1000 innings, it wouldn't be so clear cut." (That would be your quote...)...an assumption. The fact the statement even says "if" and then you comeback with "1000" (lots of innings), shows you it is not a fact, which makes it pointless...considering you only dish out the "facts." "Not because I want to be like "Haha, you're wrong, I'm right", but because when I am wrong about facts, I rather be corrected than stay wrong. I just assume everyone else is the same way. The rest of our conflicts come from defensiveness." (another one of your quotes) Which regarding Hoffman/Rivera, you're not giving me "facts" with your statement up top, but more of an assumption, with the whole "if Hoffman had the chance to do this, and did it" factor... Rabb can correct me if Im wrong here (he'll do it anyways)... I did say that it was a big part of why he is considered better. But if he was better in the post season, and Hoffman was better in the other 1000 innings, it wouldn't be so clear cut. But I'm pretty sure the only point he was making with that statement was in regards to overall value of a player. He wasn't claiming fact inasmuch as he was saying someone dominant in the post-season and great in the regular season wouldn't necessarily be viewed more favorably than someone dominant in the regular-season and geat in the post-season. The fact of the matter is, and the reason you're catching a lot of crap with this, is that you cannot judge a player based on 1-2 weeks worth of performance... Wagner, 10 IP, Hoffman 13 IP. A-Rod is the perfect microcosm why actually... Year Round Tm Opp WLser G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG SB CS SH SF HBP +------+-----+---+---+-----+---+---+---+---+--+--+--+---+---+---+-----+-----+-----+---+--+---+---+---+ 1995 ALDS SEA NYY W 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 .000 0 0 0 0 0 ALCS SEA CLE L 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 .000 .000 .000 0 0 0 0 0 1997 ALDS SEA BAL L 4 16 1 5 1 0 1 1 0 5 .313 .313 .563 0 0 0 0 0 2000 ALDS SEA CHW W 3 13 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 2 .308 .308 .308 0 1 1 0 0 ALCS SEA NYY L 6 22 4 9 2 0 2 5 3 8 .409 .480 .773 1 0 0 0 0 2004 ALDS NYY MIN W 4 19 3 8 3 0 1 3 2 1 .421 .476 .737 2 1 0 0 0 ALCS NYY BOS L 7 31 8 8 2 0 2 5 4 6 .258 .378 .516 0 0 0 0 2 2005 ALDS NYY LAA L 5 15 2 2 1 0 0 0 6 5 .133 .381 .200 1 1 2006 ALDS NYY DET L 4 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 .071 .071 .071 0 0 2007 ALDS NYY CLE L 4 15 2 4 0 0 1 1 2 6 .267 .353 .467 0 0 0 0 0 Really awesome some post seasons... heck look at 2004 for that "Can't be clutch in the playoffs theory" to look like foolishness... it's one nine game span in 2005-2006 that really skews his numbers... Now, Hoffman and Wagner haven't been able to produce much more than a week, but I'm willing to be anything, give their performance and talent, if they had almost two seasons worth of bullpen stats, they wouldn't be flashing ERAs in the 4s, 5s or 6s... Also, you called out Hoffman for blowing some games late last year... you're talking about a 39 year-old change-up specialist who's starting his natural regression. Just like Mo Rivera last year, with his 3+ ERA. I'm sure he'll probably come back and it'll sit more in the 2.5 range at the end of the season, but that's still above his career numbers. Summary: Using small sample-sizes (no mattter where you pull them from) is foolish, because, given the nature of baseball, a guy can be Babe Ruth/Bob Gibson one second and be Mario Mendoza/Brian Moehler the next. Just because it's the post-season doesn't mean small sample size doesn't apply and that you can call some guys clutch and chokers. That, and really, the Yankees (I've found) are the best players to make post-season judgements on, because they have a crap load of games in the playoffs :o That is your opinion though... obviously, a guy who's done great in the regular season as opposed to the guy who's only done great in the postseason...the regular season guy will come out on top. The thing is though...when you're comparing 2 guys who have both been great regular season closers (like Rivera and Hoffman, for example) people are always going to look at their postseason #'s to say..."that's the reason I want Mariano closing Game 7 of the World Series." "THAT's the reason why Mariano is better." This is common...just look at Kobe Bryant in the NBA, and his Michael Jordan comparisons. All of the sudden, he's getting bashed some, b/c fact is, his #'s in the NBA Finals are really below his career averages. It's common for sports athletes...and you gotta admit...there's more pressure come playoff time, than there is in the regular season knowing it's just 1 Game of 162 (and if you don't win, "get 'em tomorrow"), everytime you go out there. See, that's another bad comparison. Jordan was better than Kobe in the playoffs. He was also better in the regular season. Jordan has the record for highest career postseason scoring average AND highest career scoring average. Also, it's good to remember that Jordan was really in his peak during the 80's, when he had a stigma about "not being able to win the big one". It's kinda foolish looking back, no?
June 13, 200818 yr That is your opinion though... obviously, a guy who's done great in the regular season as opposed to the guy who's only done great in the postseason...the regular season guy will come out on top. The thing is though...when you're comparing 2 guys who have both been great regular season closers (like Rivera and Hoffman, for example) people are always going to look at their postseason #'s to say..."that's the reason I want Mariano closing Game 7 of the World Series." "THAT's the reason why Mariano is better." This is common...just look at Kobe Bryant in the NBA, and his Michael Jordan comparisons. All of the sudden, he's getting bashed some, b/c fact is, his #'s in the NBA Finals are really below his career averages. It's common for sports athletes...and you gotta admit...there's more pressure come playoff time, than there is in the regular season knowing it's just 1 Game of 162 (and if you don't win, "get 'em tomorrow"), everytime you go out there. Lemme start by saying, you guys need to cut the quotes every so often, you guys are posting half a page at a time... :whistle Secondly, you just agreed with my opinion by the looks of it... so, yeah, we disgregard that for now... I've always found the post-season "experience" thing to be a bit crazy... I mean, the game doesn't suddenly change... the mound isn't moved up 10 feet, nor is it raise 10 feet, batters still use bats, not garden hoses and they still catch the balls with their gloves, not their teeth. This is the same exact game these guys have been playing since they can walk. Some of these guys routinely play in Boston or New York, where every night is a playoff atmostphere, some have pitched in the Little League World Series, High School/State Championships, College World Series. The pressure is relative. The talent outshines the pressure. AND ESPECIALLY in baseball, where players have to have the shortest memories and recover from failure sooner than any other athlete (e.g. the next day) it's a sport predicated on failure and only those that can move on from it make it to the bigs and last. Look at Pete Incaviglia, the man was a demi-god in college baseball, pretty much never failed there (and by process of reasoning, one can assume he owned all other amateur ball he played.) He got to the bigs, had a good year, then declined because he couldn't maintain his skill by adjusting and recovering from failure. And another thing about pressure, what little the athletes may feel, they ALL do feel, so it becomes a neutral playing field, so to speak. As far as Kobe and MJ, the only real comparison between them is that Kobe on his best day is equal to, or even maybe slightly better than MJ on his best day. (That and they played most of their career for the same coach.) I don't know why you're using Kobe though, this just falls into small-sample-size again... Kobe has been pretty awesome through most of his playoffs... this is just one, and one where he's not playing lights-out... just like during the regular season, he had some stints where he'd only score like 15 points or something
June 13, 200818 yr That is your opinion though... obviously, a guy who's done great in the regular season as opposed to the guy who's only done great in the postseason...the regular season guy will come out on top. The thing is though...when you're comparing 2 guys who have both been great regular season closers (like Rivera and Hoffman, for example) people are always going to look at their postseason #'s to say..."that's the reason I want Mariano closing Game 7 of the World Series." "THAT's the reason why Mariano is better." This is common...just look at Kobe Bryant in the NBA, and his Michael Jordan comparisons. All of the sudden, he's getting bashed some, b/c fact is, his #'s in the NBA Finals are really below his career averages. It's common for sports athletes...and you gotta admit...there's more pressure come playoff time, than there is in the regular season knowing it's just 1 Game of 162 (and if you don't win, "get 'em tomorrow"), everytime you go out there. Lemme start by saying, you guys need to cut the quotes every so often, you guys are posting half a page at a time... :whistle Secondly, you just agreed with my opinion by the looks of it... so, yeah, we disgregard that for now... I've always found the post-season "experience" thing to be a bit crazy... I mean, the game doesn't suddenly change... the mound isn't moved up 10 feet, nor is it raise 10 feet, batters still use bats, not garden hoses and they still catch the balls with their gloves, not their teeth. This is the same exact game these guys have been playing since they can walk. Some of these guys routinely play in Boston or New York, where every night is a playoff atmostphere, some have pitched in Little League, High School, College, world series. The pressure is relative. The talent outshines the pressure. AND ESPECIALLY in baseball, where players have to have the shortest memories and recover from failure sooner than any other athlete (e.g. the next day) it's a sport predicated on failure and only those that can move on from it make it to the bigs and last. Look at Pete Incaviglia, the man was a demi-god in college baseball, pretty much never failed there (and by process of reasoning, one can assume he owned all other amateur ball he played.) He got to the bigs, had a good year, then declined because he couldn't maintain his skill by adjusting and recovering from failure. And another thing about pressure, what little the athletes may feel, they ALL do feel, so it becomes a neutral playing field, so to speak. As far as Kobe and MJ, the only real comparison between them is that Kobe on his best day is equal to, or even maybe slightly better than MJ on his best day. (That and they played most of their career for the same coach.) I don't know why you're using Kobe though, this just falls into small-sample-size again... Kobe has been pretty awesome through most of his playoffs... this is just one, and one where he's not playing lights-out... just like during the regular season, he had some stints where he'd only score like 15 points or something Actually, his Finals' career, which is where Jordan hit so many GW baskets...I believe Kobe came into this series, with an average of 22 PPG, and just a little over 40 % shooting in his Finals career, which isn't even good, really. And for Kobe, it's horrible, considering how good he can be. I kinda understand what you guys are saying though...I mean, the sample sizes aren't the GREATEST for some of these players, but I still do believe, the pressure is a bit different come playoff time (especially for the best players, who feel they have to lead their team...the spotlight is more on them). I believe (heck, the media believes)...the playoffs can make a really good player's legacy great. Just look at ARod...if he never wins one in NY, his legacy will look a little in different (ESPECIALLY in NY, when you're being paid 27 mill a year, and you're expected to win every year...it's their mentality). Basically the same with Kobe...if he never wins one without Shaq, he'll never see a sentence, again, with Kobe and Jordan, together, b/c even when he won...he wasn't the primary option on those teams; Shaq was. Is it wrong to view them that way? Possibly. But the media will continue thinking that way, and fact is...I think that should be the case, as well, to a certain degree.
June 13, 200818 yr Just look at ARod...if he never wins one in NY, his legacy will look a little in different (ESPECIALLY in NY, when you're being paid 27 mill a year, and you're expected to win every year...it's their mentality). You know what will happen if A-Rod doesn't win one with the Yankees? HE WILL BE KNOWN AS THE GREATEST PLAYER EVER! EEEEEEEEEVER! I guess it will just have to say "Home Run King" on his plaque in the Hall of Fame. Baseball isn't like basketball or football, where one player can carry you or doom you alone in a championship. If A-Rod doesn't hit, there are 8 other guys in the Yankee lineup who are expected to pick him up. Also, time helps give people perspective. Right now he is a chocker, but 5 years after he retires, he will be someone who hit .279 in the postseason. Right now he isn't clutch, but 5 years after he retires, he will be someone who hit .281/.378/.538 in Late and Close situations and OPSed .972 when hitting in a tie game. Right now he isn't playing up to his salary, but 5 years after he retires, he will be someone who won 2 MVP awards, 2 Home Run titles, 2 RBI titles, twice lead the league in OPS and SLG, and would have had a few Gold Gloves if Jeter didn't make him change position after he had just won two in a row. All this in the span 3 years.
June 13, 200818 yr Just look at ARod...if he never wins one in NY, his legacy will look a little in different (ESPECIALLY in NY, when you're being paid 27 mill a year, and you're expected to win every year...it's their mentality). You know what will happen if A-Rod doesn't win one with the Yankees? HE WILL BE KNOWN AS THE GREATEST PLAYER EVER! EEEEEEEEEVER! He will be known as the greatest player ever...in the regular season. Especially, in NY. ...that is if the media, doesn't get it in their heads to accuse the guy for steroids, by the time he retires. There's something I hate. When a baseball player starts hitting HR's, he's automatically on "the juice." We should save that for another topic.
June 13, 200818 yr Just look at ARod...if he never wins one in NY, his legacy will look a little in different (ESPECIALLY in NY, when you're being paid 27 mill a year, and you're expected to win every year...it's their mentality). You know what will happen if A-Rod doesn't win one with the Yankees? HE WILL BE KNOWN AS THE GREATEST PLAYER EVER! EEEEEEEEEVER! He will be known as the greatest player ever...in the regular season. Especially, in NY. ...that is if the media, doesn't get it in their heads to accuse the guy for steroids, by the time he retires. There's something I hate. When a baseball player starts hitting HR's, he's automatically on "the juice." We should save that for another topic. He has hit .279 BA and .844 OPS in the postseason, which isn't going to bring down his regular season stats. And as far as steroids goes, he has always been the media's poster child for great non-steroid players. Also, he hit 36 home runs in his first full season, which is slightly more than the 16 Bonds hit in his first full season. Bonds didn't actually break 25 until his 5th season, at age 25, unlike A-Rod who hit 36 homers at age 20. His power has always been there.
June 17, 200818 yr f*** Wagner. After a 1-2-3, 2K save? I know he's probably a top 5 closer in the league but he can't get a big save at all!
June 17, 200818 yr f*** Wagner. After a 1-2-3, 2K save? I know he's probably a top 5 closer in the league but he can't get a big save at all! It's June freakin' 17th... I like how the "big save" is the one he blew... He's lights out, and if you guys don't want him, we'd be more than willing to take him off your hands if you guys'll cover the contract
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.