July 17, 200916 yr Author Epic Fail: for some things, there's just no excuse Well saving $5+ million off a $36 million payroll and still being in contention for the division are both pretty decent excuses. The move was a salary dump, first and foremost. Its hilarious how people try to ignore that aspect of our franchise. Its the same swiss-cheese logic that results in threads about acquiring Joe Mauer. Well we're not gonna make the playoffs this year with the offense we have now. Is that really a win? I don't think so. Besides, the guy we kept over him we couldn't even trade to the Pirates. We are 5th in the NL in runs, should be adequate enough if our Starting pitching stays consistent, imo.
July 17, 200916 yr Epic Fail: for some things, there's just no excuse Well saving $5+ million off a $36 million payroll and still being in contention for the division are both pretty decent excuses. The move was a salary dump, first and foremost. Its hilarious how people try to ignore that aspect of our franchise. Its the same swiss-cheese logic that results in threads about acquiring Joe Mauer. Well we're not gonna make the playoffs this year with the offense we have now. Is that really a win? I don't think so. Besides, the guy we kept over him we couldn't even trade to the Pirates. We are 5th in the NL in runs, should be adequate enough if our Starting pitching stays consistent, imo. 5th doesnt matter its the fact that we might be the most inconsistent offense in the majors. we got 1 hit by jamie moyer.
July 17, 200916 yr Josh has a bad back that he rests rather than getting surgery. Considering that he is not even remotely full time, he may be a very productive 400 plate appearance guy that just can't hack a full season. What is that worth to you?
July 17, 200916 yr 5th doesnt matter its the fact that we might be the most inconsistent offense in the majors. we got 1 hit by jamie moyer. Try to back that statement up.
July 17, 200916 yr Author Epic Fail: for some things, there's just no excuse Well saving $5+ million off a $36 million payroll and still being in contention for the division are both pretty decent excuses. The move was a salary dump, first and foremost. Its hilarious how people try to ignore that aspect of our franchise. Its the same swiss-cheese logic that results in threads about acquiring Joe Mauer. Well we're not gonna make the playoffs this year with the offense we have now. Is that really a win? I don't think so. Besides, the guy we kept over him we couldn't even trade to the Pirates. We are 5th in the NL in runs, should be adequate enough if our Starting pitching stays consistent, imo. 5th doesnt matter its the fact that we might be the most inconsistent offense in the majors. we got 1 hit by jamie moyer. So if Jamie Moyer's pitching style matches well against the Marlins hitters, it means we have an inconsistent, weak offense? What about the Cy Young winners we hit well against?
July 17, 200916 yr We are 5th in the NL in runs, should be adequate enough if our Starting pitching stays consistent, imo. 5th doesnt matter its the fact that we might be the most inconsistent offense in the majors. we got 1 hit by jamie moyer. So if Jamie Moyer's pitching style matches well against the Marlins hitters, it means we have an inconsistent, weak offense? What about the Cy Young winners we hit well against? What about the ones we didn't hit well against? The bottom line is that pretty much every hitter in our offense is, pardon the pun, hit or miss. And they don't do the small things right at all. You can generate all the runs you want in big wins, but the fact of the matter is that when it comes to doing the small things right, which is what it takes to beat quality and crafty pitchers, we have an inability to do so. We may be 5th in the league in runs but I'd love to see how many runners we also leave on. This offense really needs one more hitter who knows how to go up there and give you quality at bats and do what he needs to do. That will make our offense more consistent. Josh Willingham isn't necessarily that guy, but he was a lot closer to it than Jeremy Hermida, Dan Uggla, Jorge Cantu, and Cody Ross. And last I checked, 5th in anything doesn't get you anywhere. Only the top 4 teams move on. And while it's nice to have winning seasons to feel good about things, the bottom line is that the championship is what its supposed to be about. And excuse me if I don't think our inconsistent offense and average starting pitching can edge out the slugging of the Phillies, the powerhouse that is the Dodgers, or the Cy Young caliber rotation of the Giants. We are a sleeper team but so are teams like the Cubs (who have much more talent than us, it just hasn't shown up and yet they are still in it), the Rockies, etc. Come September I'll be doing the same thing I'm always doing- watching the Dolphins. Because at the end of it, 70 wins and 84 wins is really all the same to me when we don't make the playoffs.
July 17, 200916 yr We are 5th in the NL in runs, should be adequate enough if our Starting pitching stays consistent, imo. 5th doesnt matter its the fact that we might be the most inconsistent offense in the majors. we got 1 hit by jamie moyer. So if Jamie Moyer's pitching style matches well against the Marlins hitters, it means we have an inconsistent, weak offense? What about the Cy Young winners we hit well against? What about the ones we didn't hit well against? The bottom line is that pretty much every hitter in our offense is, pardon the pun, hit or miss. And they don't do the small things right at all. You can generate all the runs you want in big wins, but the fact of the matter is that when it comes to doing the small things right, which is what it takes to beat quality and crafty pitchers, we have an inability to do so. We may be 5th in the league in runs but I'd love to see how many runners we also leave on. This offense really needs one more hitter who knows how to go up there and give you quality at bats and do what he needs to do. That will make our offense more consistent. Josh Willingham isn't necessarily that guy, but he was a lot closer to it than Jeremy Hermida, Dan Uggla, Jorge Cantu, and Cody Ross. And last I checked, 5th in anything doesn't get you anywhere. Only the top 4 teams move on. And while it's nice to have winning seasons to feel good about things, the bottom line is that the championship is what its supposed to be about. And excuse me if I don't think our inconsistent offense and average starting pitching can edge out the slugging of the Phillies, the powerhouse that is the Dodgers, or the Cy Young caliber rotation of the Giants. We are a sleeper team but so are teams like the Cubs (who have much more talent than us, it just hasn't shown up and yet they are still in it), the Rockies, etc. Come September I'll be doing the same thing I'm always doing- watching the Dolphins. Because at the end of it, 70 wins and 84 wins is really all the same to me when we don't make the playoffs. this
July 17, 200916 yr Author We are 5th in the NL in runs, should be adequate enough if our Starting pitching stays consistent, imo. 5th doesnt matter its the fact that we might be the most inconsistent offense in the majors. we got 1 hit by jamie moyer. So if Jamie Moyer's pitching style matches well against the Marlins hitters, it means we have an inconsistent, weak offense? What about the Cy Young winners we hit well against? What about the ones we didn't hit well against? The bottom line is that pretty much every hitter in our offense is, pardon the pun, hit or miss. And they don't do the small things right at all. You can generate all the runs you want in big wins, but the fact of the matter is that when it comes to doing the small things right, which is what it takes to beat quality and crafty pitchers, we have an inability to do so. We may be 5th in the league in runs but I'd love to see how many runners we also leave on. This offense really needs one more hitter who knows how to go up there and give you quality at bats and do what he needs to do. That will make our offense more consistent. Josh Willingham isn't necessarily that guy, but he was a lot closer to it than Jeremy Hermida, Dan Uggla, Jorge Cantu, and Cody Ross. And last I checked, 5th in anything doesn't get you anywhere. Only the top 4 teams move on. And while it's nice to have winning seasons to feel good about things, the bottom line is that the championship is what its supposed to be about. And excuse me if I don't think our inconsistent offense and average starting pitching can edge out the slugging of the Phillies, the powerhouse that is the Dodgers, or the Cy Young caliber rotation of the Giants. We are a sleeper team but so are teams like the Cubs (who have much more talent than us, it just hasn't shown up and yet they are still in it), the Rockies, etc. Come September I'll be doing the same thing I'm always doing- watching the Dolphins. Because at the end of it, 70 wins and 84 wins is really all the same to me when we don't make the playoffs. Pitching has a bigger impact on wins anyway. I'm not even going to look and I'll still guarantee a bunch of teams recently have made the playoffs while finished outside of the top 4 in runs.
July 17, 200916 yr Epic Fail: for some things, there's just no excuse Well saving $5+ million off a $36 million payroll and still being in contention for the division are both pretty decent excuses. The move was a salary dump, first and foremost. Its hilarious how people try to ignore that aspect of our franchise. Its the same swiss-cheese logic that results in threads about acquiring Joe Mauer. Well we're not gonna make the playoffs this year with the offense we have now. Is that really a win? I don't think so. Besides, the guy we kept over him we couldn't even trade to the Pirates. Hindsight. At the time, nobody was complaining that we retained Hermida instead of Willingham. It was clear one of the two had to go, and Hermida was slightly cheaper, younger, and with more upside. Plus there was Willingham's back issues.
July 17, 200916 yr We're 5th in runs scored (4.56 per game) but we're 12th in OPS at .723. The run scoring will go down by a good chunk if we keep OPSing .723.
July 17, 200916 yr Yeah, we lost on this one. That said, it's still worth seeing if his back holds up all season.
July 17, 200916 yr Epic Fail: for some things, there's just no excuse Well saving $5+ million off a $36 million payroll and still being in contention for the division are both pretty decent excuses. The move was a salary dump, first and foremost. Its hilarious how people try to ignore that aspect of our franchise. Its the same swiss-cheese logic that results in threads about acquiring Joe Mauer. Well we're not gonna make the playoffs this year with the offense we have now. Is that really a win? I don't think so. Besides, the guy we kept over him we couldn't even trade to the Pirates. Hindsight. At the time, nobody was complaining that we retained Hermida instead of Willingham. It was clear one of the two had to go, and Hermida was slightly cheaper, younger, and with more upside. Plus there was Willingham's back issues. But here is the problem in that. We traded away the guy whose trade value was at an all-time move. And while Smolinski or whoever might be a nice prospect, the fact of the matter is that Olsen and Willingham were both practically give-aways for salary reasons. And a give-away does absolutely nothing to help your team win next year. I realize that the Hermida thing is somewhat hindsight, but we're talking about guys whose job it is 24/7 to put together a good baseball team. They have to be approaching situations with a certain degree of foresight and if they aren't, they are only going to be mediocre. And just giving away parts leaves you as nothing but mediocre. How was our team supposed to improve in last year's record if all we did was give a couple guys away without adequate replacements? What would have been much better for this team is to make some sort of trade that actually benefited this ballclub. We needed to cut salary, we all know that, but trading a guy like Hermida whose value was much higher than Willingham's would have made a lot more sense because we could have gotten something more than spare parts. And I know that some still imagine Hermida with some incredible talent ceiling but the reality that we're looking at is that the best he could become is what Josh Willingham already is and has been. Hermida is just another "tools" guy who hasn't and likely won't maximize his potential while Willingham is the very under-rated player who actually performs. There's a reason why I'm rooting for a blockbuster deal (with some of our major league players) come deadline time. If we stay as-is, we're not gonna make it. Giving away any of our starting players would be a gamble, but it's time we roll the dice again. Because when Dan Uggla, Josh Johnson, Jorge Cantu, and Cody Ross all price themselves out of our market, we're gonna be wishing we tried to do what it took to make the playoffs instead of being content with mediocrity. If you're gonna lose players inevitably, at least make their value work for you.
July 17, 200916 yr Yeah, we lost on this one. That said, it's still worth seeing if his back holds up all season. Four months from a good player is better than six months from a worthless one.
July 17, 200916 yr We're 5th in runs scored (4.56 per game) but we're 12th in OPS at .723. The run scoring will go down by a good chunk if we keep OPSing .723. But we're also one of the best base running teams http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2009/7/14/949376/dont-forget-the-baserunning +10 runs 10 runs is worth roughly 30 OPS points So that'd put us at .753 which would be 5th but that's not all that accurate because that doesn't change other teams. Doing 1 run = .003 points that'd put us 6th col .823 phil .780 lad .779 mil .759 stl .755 flor .753 was .742 so we should be able to keep that up give me a bit and I'll try doings XR per game + baserunning runs
July 18, 200916 yr ok this is rather annoying Either I did something wrong (though I've triple checked and don't see any errors) or the formula on the wiki page is wrong because XR is giving me about 150 less runs on average than what a team has actually scofed and that can't be right. So I went with RC which is what I always used in the past but again either I did somethign wrong although i've checked and don't see any errors or just something is off because it says that every team has scored less runs than they should have by an average of 20 per team. wOBA is giving me a lot lot lot better results which says we'd be -6.62 runs under average but that'd still rank us 7th in the NL. So we should be able to roughly keep up our runs per game. probably a small drop off
July 18, 200916 yr Well I just translated it to per game cuz I didn't really realize that and definitely not as sexy. ours Runs/game is 5th at 4.56 with woba runs + br runs we'd average only 4.26 runs per game, which is tied 9th with ARI.
July 18, 200916 yr Yeah, we lost on this one. That said, it's still worth seeing if his back holds up all season. Four months from a good player is better than six months from a worthless one. Like I said, we lost this one. That said, it's going to be important to track his back and Smolinski before it's all said and done.
July 18, 200916 yr Yeah, we lost on this one. That said, it's still worth seeing if his back holds up all season. Four months from a good player is better than six months from a worthless one. Like I said, we lost this one. That said, it's going to be important to track his back and Smolinski before it's all said and done. I think Smolinski could be pretty good. The problem is that he is so far from the majors and while I say "could be pretty good", that's for his position, and a pretty good middle infielder isn't necessarily an impact player. It's hardly worth trading for prospects in the lower minors that don't have a high ceiling. We're gonna have to wait 2-3 years to see an impact from him when we could have used some help on the major league squad.
July 18, 200916 yr But here is the problem in that. We traded away the guy whose trade value was at an all-time move. And while Smolinski or whoever might be a nice prospect, the fact of the matter is that Olsen and Willingham were both practically give-aways for salary reasons. And a give-away does absolutely nothing to help your team win next year. I realize that the Hermida thing is somewhat hindsight, but we're talking about guys whose job it is 24/7 to put together a good baseball team. They have to be approaching situations with a certain degree of foresight and if they aren't, they are only going to be mediocre. And just giving away parts leaves you as nothing but mediocre. How was our team supposed to improve in last year's record if all we did was give a couple guys away without adequate replacements? What would have been much better for this team is to make some sort of trade that actually benefited this ballclub. We needed to cut salary, we all know that, but trading a guy like Hermida whose value was much higher than Willingham's would have made a lot more sense because we could have gotten something more than spare parts. And I know that some still imagine Hermida with some incredible talent ceiling but the reality that we're looking at is that the best he could become is what Josh Willingham already is and has been. Hermida is just another "tools" guy who hasn't and likely won't maximize his potential while Willingham is the very under-rated player who actually performs. There's a reason why I'm rooting for a blockbuster deal (with some of our major league players) come deadline time. If we stay as-is, we're not gonna make it. Giving away any of our starting players would be a gamble, but it's time we roll the dice again. Because when Dan Uggla, Josh Johnson, Jorge Cantu, and Cody Ross all price themselves out of our market, we're gonna be wishing we tried to do what it took to make the playoffs instead of being content with mediocrity. If you're gonna lose players inevitably, at least make their value work for you. It's still hindsight though. We wouldn't be having this discussion if Hermida was the one with the .958 OPS. There is a reason Hermida had the value he did in the offseason, and nine times out of ten you trade Willingham in that situation. The poor return in that trade is a seperate issue. Our guess was as good as the FO when determining who would have the .958 OPS in July.
July 18, 200916 yr We could have had Edwin Jackson in the rotation and Josh Willingham in the OF hindsight is 20/20 and I would have DETESTED the jackson/hermida trade at the time but just sayin'
July 18, 200916 yr If anyone wants to know why our offense is insufficient and inconsistent, the bottom of the ninth tonight was a perfect example. We got the first two batters on, including perhaps the fastest guy in the majors, and we couldn't bring them around to score. At the same time, look at the guys who got things going for us in the fist place- Helms and Gload, two guys who know how to give you quality at bats. It's not always about which guy is gonna hit thirty homers, sometimes you just need the guys you can count on to get a single with the game on the line.
July 18, 200916 yr But here is the problem in that. We traded away the guy whose trade value was at an all-time move. And while Smolinski or whoever might be a nice prospect, the fact of the matter is that Olsen and Willingham were both practically give-aways for salary reasons. And a give-away does absolutely nothing to help your team win next year. I realize that the Hermida thing is somewhat hindsight, but we're talking about guys whose job it is 24/7 to put together a good baseball team. They have to be approaching situations with a certain degree of foresight and if they aren't, they are only going to be mediocre. And just giving away parts leaves you as nothing but mediocre. How was our team supposed to improve in last year's record if all we did was give a couple guys away without adequate replacements? What would have been much better for this team is to make some sort of trade that actually benefited this ballclub. We needed to cut salary, we all know that, but trading a guy like Hermida whose value was much higher than Willingham's would have made a lot more sense because we could have gotten something more than spare parts. And I know that some still imagine Hermida with some incredible talent ceiling but the reality that we're looking at is that the best he could become is what Josh Willingham already is and has been. Hermida is just another "tools" guy who hasn't and likely won't maximize his potential while Willingham is the very under-rated player who actually performs. There's a reason why I'm rooting for a blockbuster deal (with some of our major league players) come deadline time. If we stay as-is, we're not gonna make it. Giving away any of our starting players would be a gamble, but it's time we roll the dice again. Because when Dan Uggla, Josh Johnson, Jorge Cantu, and Cody Ross all price themselves out of our market, we're gonna be wishing we tried to do what it took to make the playoffs instead of being content with mediocrity. If you're gonna lose players inevitably, at least make their value work for you. It's still hindsight though. We wouldn't be having this discussion if Hermida was the one with the .958 OPS. There is a reason Hermida had the value he did in the offseason, and nine times out of ten you trade Willingham in that situation. The poor return in that trade is a seperate issue. Our guess was as good as the FO when determining who would have the .958 OPS in July. There was a reason why Delmon Young's value was high when he was traded for Matt Garza and Jason Bartlett. There was also a reason why the Rays went to the WS last year and it has a lot to do with this trade. If your team operates under a constricted budget, with the inability to bring in free agents, the only way you are going to improve is by making trades that make the most of the value you have. And while some trades can be sort of a gamble, that's simply what it takes sometimes in order to improve your team.
July 18, 200916 yr But here is the problem in that. We traded away the guy whose trade value was at an all-time move. And while Smolinski or whoever might be a nice prospect, the fact of the matter is that Olsen and Willingham were both practically give-aways for salary reasons. And a give-away does absolutely nothing to help your team win next year. I realize that the Hermida thing is somewhat hindsight, but we're talking about guys whose job it is 24/7 to put together a good baseball team. They have to be approaching situations with a certain degree of foresight and if they aren't, they are only going to be mediocre. And just giving away parts leaves you as nothing but mediocre. How was our team supposed to improve in last year's record if all we did was give a couple guys away without adequate replacements? What would have been much better for this team is to make some sort of trade that actually benefited this ballclub. We needed to cut salary, we all know that, but trading a guy like Hermida whose value was much higher than Willingham's would have made a lot more sense because we could have gotten something more than spare parts. And I know that some still imagine Hermida with some incredible talent ceiling but the reality that we're looking at is that the best he could become is what Josh Willingham already is and has been. Hermida is just another "tools" guy who hasn't and likely won't maximize his potential while Willingham is the very under-rated player who actually performs. There's a reason why I'm rooting for a blockbuster deal (with some of our major league players) come deadline time. If we stay as-is, we're not gonna make it. Giving away any of our starting players would be a gamble, but it's time we roll the dice again. Because when Dan Uggla, Josh Johnson, Jorge Cantu, and Cody Ross all price themselves out of our market, we're gonna be wishing we tried to do what it took to make the playoffs instead of being content with mediocrity. If you're gonna lose players inevitably, at least make their value work for you. It's still hindsight though. We wouldn't be having this discussion if Hermida was the one with the .958 OPS. There is a reason Hermida had the value he did in the offseason, and nine times out of ten you trade Willingham in that situation. The poor return in that trade is a seperate issue. Our guess was as good as the FO when determining who would have the .958 OPS in July. There was a reason why Delmon Young's value was high when he was traded for Matt Garza and Jason Bartlett. There was also a reason why the Rays went to the WS last year and it has a lot to do with this trade. If your team operates under a constricted budget, with the inability to bring in free agents, the only way you are going to improve is by making trades that make the most of the value you have. And while some trades can be sort of a gamble, that's simply what it takes sometimes in order to improve your team. First of all, there's no garuntee that if we traded Hermida, we would have gotten back equal to greater value in return. Let alone pieces that would help us to a title run. It's far more likely we would have gotten prospects. Secondly, Delmon Young is a bad comparable. We're talking about a guy who was, at one point, considered a top three prospect in all of baseball. His value was significantly higher than what Hermida's was last offseason. You're also ignoring the fact that, at the time, it appeared we had adequate in house replacements for both Willingham and Olsen. Maybin was to solidify CF, and Miller slid into Olsen's spot in the rotation. Again, we wouldn't be having this conversation if Hermida's OPS was hovering around .900. Hind to the sight.
July 18, 200916 yr But here is the problem in that. We traded away the guy whose trade value was at an all-time move. And while Smolinski or whoever might be a nice prospect, the fact of the matter is that Olsen and Willingham were both practically give-aways for salary reasons. And a give-away does absolutely nothing to help your team win next year. I realize that the Hermida thing is somewhat hindsight, but we're talking about guys whose job it is 24/7 to put together a good baseball team. They have to be approaching situations with a certain degree of foresight and if they aren't, they are only going to be mediocre. And just giving away parts leaves you as nothing but mediocre. How was our team supposed to improve in last year's record if all we did was give a couple guys away without adequate replacements? What would have been much better for this team is to make some sort of trade that actually benefited this ballclub. We needed to cut salary, we all know that, but trading a guy like Hermida whose value was much higher than Willingham's would have made a lot more sense because we could have gotten something more than spare parts. And I know that some still imagine Hermida with some incredible talent ceiling but the reality that we're looking at is that the best he could become is what Josh Willingham already is and has been. Hermida is just another "tools" guy who hasn't and likely won't maximize his potential while Willingham is the very under-rated player who actually performs. There's a reason why I'm rooting for a blockbuster deal (with some of our major league players) come deadline time. If we stay as-is, we're not gonna make it. Giving away any of our starting players would be a gamble, but it's time we roll the dice again. Because when Dan Uggla, Josh Johnson, Jorge Cantu, and Cody Ross all price themselves out of our market, we're gonna be wishing we tried to do what it took to make the playoffs instead of being content with mediocrity. If you're gonna lose players inevitably, at least make their value work for you. It's still hindsight though. We wouldn't be having this discussion if Hermida was the one with the .958 OPS. There is a reason Hermida had the value he did in the offseason, and nine times out of ten you trade Willingham in that situation. The poor return in that trade is a seperate issue. Our guess was as good as the FO when determining who would have the .958 OPS in July. There was a reason why Delmon Young's value was high when he was traded for Matt Garza and Jason Bartlett. There was also a reason why the Rays went to the WS last year and it has a lot to do with this trade. If your team operates under a constricted budget, with the inability to bring in free agents, the only way you are going to improve is by making trades that make the most of the value you have. And while some trades can be sort of a gamble, that's simply what it takes sometimes in order to improve your team. First of all, there's no garuntee that if we traded Hermida, we would have gotten back equal to greater value in return. Let alone pieces that would help us to a title run. It's far more likely we would have gotten prospects. Secondly, Delmon Young is a bad comparable. We're talking about a guy who was, at one point, considered a top three prospect in all of baseball. His value was significantly higher than what Hermida's was last offseason. You're also ignoring the fact that, at the time, it appeared we had adequate in house replacements for both Willingham and Olsen. Maybin was to solidify CF, and Miller slid into Olsen's spot in the rotation. Again, we wouldn't be having this conversation if Hermida's OPS was hovering around .900. Hind to the sight. I never believed that Maybin was ready and I said as much many times in the offseason. Same for Miller, but he has actually pitched pretty well. Secondly, Delmon Young was highly rated- I'll give you that. But until this year Jeremy Hermida was very highly rated as well, if not as high as Young. Only this year have teams caught on that Hermida isn't the player he was supposed to be. I don't know what exactly you would have gotten in exchange for Hermida. But I guarantee it could have gotten more than a fringe-prospect middle infielder and a low minors infield prospect. And seriously- lets stop this whole hypothetical if Hermida had a .900 OPS. Willingham had dramatically out OPSed Hermida in his time as a Marlin and Hermida sure didn't look like he was edging closer as he put up a .720 OPS last year. This is while Willingham put up an .830 OPS. The probability of Hermida putting up a .900 OPS this year and Willingham doing the same is just not even in the same ballpark. Even if Hermida's 2007, his OPS was only 10-20 points better than what Willingham has been doing consistently. And Hermida only did that for 123 games in one season. Clearly the numbers point to Willingham being the much better player. And yes, he was the older player, but Hermida had dramatically regressed. Yet despite this regression, Hermida was still the one who was highly value around the league because those who didn't see his ineptitude every day didn't have any idea how far he was from ever reaching his ceiling. People still thought of Hermida as the highly touted prospect who was supposed to win the rookie of the year, not the guy who had fly balls bounce off his face in RF. When you consider how much better a player Willingham was, compared to how much higher the perception of Hermida was, it's absolutely BAFFLING that we gave Hammer away. I'm infuriated just thinking about it.
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.