|
|
|
|
Baseball Primer Newsblog— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Well, outside of Arthur Shawcross’ mother...I guess so.
Still, Mets fans still like to bash him for his makeup and all those blatantly stupid plays in the field and believe it has been holding him back from realizing his full potential. Dayton Moore, the General Manager of the Kansas City Royals, likes to say that, to succeed in baseball, you must have intelligence, integrity, and passion. But should we not remember that we are talking about the same kid who battled incessant injuries, could not hit any other pitch aside from a fastball, and was inept at getting on base from 2003-2005, and is now one of the best offensive shortstops in baseball?
More importantly, from a more analytical standpoint, Mets fans seem incapable of appreciating Reyes’s value and how to best go about exploiting it. Reyes’s disappointing defensive performance thus far has almost certainly taken its’ toll on his value, but offensively, his OBA (on-base average), is second only to Hanley Ramirez among National League shortstops. In addition, while his pitch selection is still questionable, Reyes’s P/PA numbers since 2004 have always been from the 3.5-3.7 area, and his numbers with RISP (.260/.368/.448) and with men-on (.280/.383/.465), are largely in line with his total numbers this year (.304/361/.490). Instead of prodding him to hit more ground balls as Randolph and co. suggested this year (when in fact there is little correlation between that and his overall success), Reyes is, like most if not any other hitter, most successful when hitting line drives.
Repoz
Posted: August 20, 2008 at 08:22 AM | 33 comment(s)
Related News: General, NY Mets
|
My Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
|
|
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Not to get all English 101 about this, but a scapegoat is someone / something UNFAIRLY blamed for a problem. All the complaints about the Mets' bullpen are totally deserved.
I don;t think the problem is the fanbase, the problem is the great mass of sports mediots here in NYC, the fans appreciate Reyes, the mediots have taken a disliking to him for reason a that I can't quite understand.
Yes he has lapses of attention, and he doesn't always run our ground balls as hard as he can, but he's nothing like BJ Upton in that regard,- and god forbid he sometime shows emotion on the field...
Willie Randolph?
He was axed because the ownership and the GM wanted to shift blame, so he was scapegoated, but his performance more than sufficiently warranted his whacking.
That's certainly the current usage, but in the beginning, a scapegoat was merely an animal sacrificed (metaphorically or otherwise) to expiate the failures of a greater community. In Biblical times, the Jews would lay the sins of the people on the head of a goat, to be turned loose in the wilderness (similar in many ways to the "king-for-a-day" practice of numerous other ancient/modern people - there's a good description of the phenomenon in Frazier's "The Golden Bough").
The goat is carrying away the sins of the community, but he himself is not necessarily pure or impure. He's just a vessel.
It was not a fight.
It was not the last game of the season but the one the night before.
Whatever "foolishness and immaturity" had nothing to do with Tom veteranrific Glavine not being able to get out of the first inning.
The media can dislike Reyes. Apart from all of the reasons named above in comments 4, 9, 10, there is also just a simple laziness. The Mets have had 4 fulltime starters this season: Wright, Reyes, Beltran, Delgado. Basically any quick analysis of the Mets season is going to only grapple with those players ... hacks like Lupica are not going to talk about what an Endy/Tatis platoon offers to the team. Those four players will represent everything good and bad about the Mets. Wright is Mr Perfect and Delgado's resurgence is one of the surprises of the season, so that leaves Reyes and Beltran to take the brunt of it. Beltran gets #### because he seems flippant, Reyes gets #### for the opposite reason, because he seems like a showboat.
Fans love both of them ... Beltran is standing on shakier ground but he still gets huge cheers at Shea every day, and the same fans that curse when he strikes out looking will tell you next inning that he's the best fielder in baseball.
And it was in a 13-0 victory, which means it provided spark and leadership, not immaturity and foolishness.
I hate the graphic SNY shows, seemingly all the time, which shows his numbers in wins and losses, and is used as proof that "Reyes makes the Mets go" or something. Reyes this year is hitting 331/396/576 in wins, and 266/320/371 in losses. To borrow a word from Keith, this difference looks pretty stark, but when SNY flashes this graphic they never do it for anybody else on the team, so you are left with no way to tell if that is a normal disparity.
David Wright hits 348/429/630 in wins, and 217/323/358 in losses. Maybe Wright makes the Mets go.
Beltran hits 303/386/554 in wins, and 238/343/354 in losses. I guess Beltran makes the Mets go.
Well, that's exactly the point, the goat is innocent yet sacrificed on behalf of the guilty. I'm not seeing any shade of difference, personally, except that Reyes isn't precisely a goat and he's not precisely being killed.
The goat isn't necessarily innocent. He's just a goat who was in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Whenever a king-for-a-day is chosen, the people usually don't go out of their way to pick an innocent. The determination is essentially arbitrary, whether through drawing lots, or on a volunteer basis, or by winning a contest. Whenever he carries away everyone else's bad fortune or sins or whatever, he's also carrying away his own.
Well Yom Kippur is still almost 2 months away, plenty of time for Reyes to become a goat.
What, he was bleating the name of God in vain? Coveting his neighbor's tin cans? Goats are innocent by virtue of being beasts.
By prompted a fight do you mean prompted Miguel Olivo to act like a dick?
Innocent in the sense of being immune from original sin, maybe. But if they weren't capable of carrying moral debits/credits, then how would Aaron have applied the sins of his people to the goat in the first place?
Anyway, if you've kept goats, you'd know that "innocent" isn't a word you'd apply to one lightly. My grandmother used to keep goats. They chewed all the aluminum siding off the back of her house to the maximum height that a goat could reach, and any time you bent down, one would pop you right in the butt.
Kurt Angle says, you forgot one.
And Poland? Or is it Mike Crudale?
Have to agree with 18. Whatever the goat's objective innocence is, it is specifically innocent of the charge of offending God or the gods.
The reason why the term doesn't work for the bullpen but does for Reyes is that the charge is playing bad baseball. Sending Reyes into the woods would be like sending the goat; sending Heilman/Feliciano/Sanchez into the woods would be like sending the jerks into the woods who initially pissed off the deity in the first place.
Edit: A little clarity
Non-humans can offend God. What about Jesus cursing the barren fig tree?
"Sending Reyes into the woods would be like sending the goat; sending Heilman/Feliciano/Sanchez into the woods would be like sending the jerks into the woods who initially pissed off the deity in the first place."
If you're assigning Feliciano the consequences of Heilman blowing a particular game, how would that not work? Feliciano didn't blow that game - Heilman did.
So even if you disagree on the morality of the goat, it's still wrong.
There's a mistranslation there, of course, but that's another story...
Aramis Ramirez in wins: .365/.462/.668
Aramis Ramirez in losses: .155/.253/.242
Clearly a case of starting with a premise and then going about "proving" it.
And SNY is a joke in general. I'm a Yankee fan and have to watch both SNY and YES with the mute button on, but at least YES doesn't put the camera on a goofball like Kevin Burkhardt five times a game, often just so he can interview random people in the stands. Or broadcast the game from the stands...what's the point of that? Interviews in the booth while the game is going on (Minaya tonight)...doing call-in shows...it's freakin' Sabado Gigante without the gorgeous, half-naked women.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main