User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.5616 seconds
51 querie(s) executed
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.
Your sight and site sucks.
The dreadlocks. The baggy pants. The je ne sais quoi.
Perhaps he will become the new Albert Belle?
sing it with me!
"I believe the children are the future..."
All young people look the same to Jim Rice.
That's freakin' gold!! Gold I tell ya!! :-)
After he took off his shirt of course.
He's definitely not as bad, but the fact that he didn't offer to switch position when ARod arrived in New York is a minor issue.
What is it? You state the "steady decline" as if it was a fact. From the beining of human existance there has been disrespect, impoliteness and immorality. It is nothing new. The only thing new, perhaps, is how it gets framed. To Rice, it is obviously baggy uniforms and dreadlocks.
Rice is just a racist.
interesting that jim ed has forgot ALL about ALL the guys his own age who had ALL kind of contract arguments
interesting that jim ed has forgot ALL about ALL the guys who went to DH so as they could up their hitting stats once they couldn't play REAL baseball
- which reminds me
now exactly what is wrong with dreads?
We don't know for the fact that Jeter was asked to switch position!! I know jeter may not be like as media has portrait but he can't be that bad ...
It is nothing new. The only thing new, perhaps, is how it gets framed.
Well, plus, the internet.
He should have offered publicly, to make it such that the Yankees could do what's best for the team without any controversy. He should have just said something like, "If Joe Torre thinks it's best for the team to move me to third base, I'm happy to do that. I'm excited to have a superstar like Alex Rodriguez as a teammate." It would have been within the caricature of what he is that the media have created for him to do that. I don't really blame him for saying nothing at that time, though.
They weren't snoozing, they were playing dead.
not to mention a lot of the other stuff they liked to do in the 70's, wife swapping? sure. beat a guy up with a baseball bat for beaning you? no problem. Disco riots? of course.
In one of the Mauer/Tex threads MSilva linked to a voter for the MVP in 2006 who didn't vote for Jeter because according to him Jeter was a destructive influence in the clubhouse with his feud with Arod.
why should he do that!! i mean he may not has been able play Third base, he hasn't played other position except ss !! look at the present situation it seems Yankees have made the right decision....also Arod said he will Play third base
Once again, Rice has no business being in the Hall of Fame, and since he's gotten in he's ripped Tony Gwynn and Derek Jeter.
Thanks BobShaughnessyGammonsESPNWEEIGlobeHerald for driving the Hall of Fame train for Rice and creating the myth that he was the most feared hitter of his era.
what is that from? I missed that one, and who has the right to rip Tony Gwynn?
At the time, ARod was definitely a better defensive shortstop. Whether he's also much better at third than Jeter would have been, I can't say. But essentially, Jeter made it clear by not saying anything that shortstop was his position, and the new guy was going to have to be the one to move. Again, this is totally normal behavior for a big leaguer - it is out of character with what the media have built up Jeter to be.
They were talking about it on WEEI in Boston one day, but it may have been an off camera comment when he was working the Red Sox post game and said that Tony Gwynn was not the same class of Hall of Famer he was, and that if you started a team you'd pick him over Gwynn any day of the week."
funny how he didn't insult a former Red Sox shortstop.
And I am NOT just talking about baseball.
wow delusions of grandeur I guess. I mean I would probably want two of Rices years over Gwynns (maybe) but if you even go out five years it's no longer a contest, and that is just talking hitting, add the steals, character and maybe even defense and Gwynn has it all over him.
Well that part is certainly true. Gwynn is in the mid level of HoF'ers while Rice is in the "How the #### did they get in?" group with George Kelly and Tommy McCarthy.
Your agitation appears to be messing with your ability to type. Take a deep breath.
The jack-ass said this about Gwynn (and Ripken):
“You can also look at Cal Ripken, did he dominate? Did Tony Gwynn dominate? No he didn’t. When you’re looking at a team, you want a guy driving a guy in. You can be a dominant player in different situations.”
Nothing irks me more than the old bitter ballplayer.
U know it's all hyperbola....We don't know What went at that time .... for this We can't say Jeter is bad person...
I still laugh every time.
lol:)
Well, exactly how did you think Rice ended up with herpes?
It ain't elves...
Primey.
About 100 years ago?
I really don't know if you're serious or not but I'll add that Rice ranting at Little Leaguers shows a lack of respect, politeness and dignity and that hairstyles and baggy pants are not moral issues.
And clearly anyone who would say anything the least bit negative about Mr. Jeter is a total nut job.
Look at that sloppy punk his with jersey hanging down around his thighs. He should be ashamed of himself.
Smart kids. Maybe after they heard the Jeter part they thought "Oh, this guy's crazy" and it was nap time.
And yes, I realize it was just because they were ages 11 to 13. Still, a man can dream.
Adolescent boys are very keenly aware of when someone is full of it, probably more than any other age group you could pick.
Dreadlocks and baggy pants are bad examples. But what do these images show? Respect?
- bad examples of WHAT?
pthomas Posted: August 21, 2009 at 02:35 PM (#3301049)
And, of course, the players from the 60's and 70's never shot beaver.
- correct
they F****D beaver. especially beaver belonging to females who were not their wives
I <3 BBTF
- bad examples of WHAT?
Fashion sense.
How has no one pointed this gem out yet?
Interesting stat I found on him: Most run estimators put him around +30 wins/ +300 runs for his career, mine, B-ref, Fangraphs. But Fangraphs WPA has him at 22.65 wins, 7 wins less than you'd expect from his batting numbers. Talk about being unclutch, piling up your numbers when they mean the least.
So that's who did that to my beavers. I owe Ryan Jones an apology.
My hope of all hopes as a Red Sox fan: A Dewey/Manny number 24 retirement ceremony. That would just kick so much ass.
#### Jim Rice.
In other news:
Thanks to the ignore button (still appears to be working), that hilarious typo will be the last thing I ever read from that guy.
You most certainly do.
Well, unless your nickname for your mom is "Beavers."
Jeter on Rice’s comments: “I didn’t know I was like that. That’s a first for me.”
Joe Torre was the one who made it clear. He did so by pencilling Derek Jeter's name onto a lineup card with "6" next to it.
guess i'm gonna have to tell jim ed and da goose to get the he!! offn my carpet....
I always wondered why vagina-measuring never caught on.
Yes, but Torre was smart enough to know that the team was better with a happy Jeter than a sulking Jeter. ARod was the more mature, team-oriented player on this issue, by coming out and saying he'd move positions to go to a winning team.
of course this makes the assumption that Jeter would have sulked, since he was never asked(to our knowledge) it's hard to know what he would have done.
If Torre ever had any issue with Jeter's attitude about playing shortstop or general sulkiness, I would think we'd have read about it by now.
Which was the only way the Yankees were trading for him, since they made it clear to him that they wanted him for 3B before the trade was done. Why should Jeter have said he'd move to 3B when it was already decided by the Yankees' FO and coaches that A-Rod would play 3B?
There are only two possibilities here. One is that Torre genuinely believed that Jeter at short and ARod at third was the best defensive alignment for the team. The other is that Torre didn't want to rock the boat. I think Torre's a smart enough baseball man that he knew ARod would be a better defensive shortstop.
i don't know either
but us females don't use expressions where we would substitute female gonads for male gonads
(yeh, my left ovary) (suck my uterus)
etc
That can be true, and moving Jeter to third can still not be the best defensive alignment for the team.
And apparently he's also a gaping #######.
Everyone in Boston already knew this. That's why I was surprised the Boston media and Red Sox organization went so hard for him for the HOF. Why not invest that energy in a somewhat more deserving player who was a much nicer guy named Johnny Pesky?
Well, good luck finding someone to do this.
(I have heard females say "suck my c**t" before)
It does make sense that the minimum level of hitting is higher for the easy defensive positions than the harder defensive positions. Once you get to the major league level, there's almost no correlation between hitting ability and fielding ability. That means that if the defensive requirements are higher, there aren't very many good hitters available, so you have to settle for lesser hitters.
Now, onto part 2. Both Jeter and ARod were good enough hitters a few years ago to play any position (and still are). The point then, is that you need to get both of them in the lineup, and set up the defense so that it is as good as possible. If ARod's a better hitter than Jeter, and a better fielder, then he's just a better player. That's all there is to it.
Everyone in Boston already knew this. That's why I was surprised the Boston media and Red Sox organization went so hard for him for the HOF.
Yet one more aspect of the remarkable revisionist history that the Rice-for-the-HOF campaign became.
And by this argument it makes more sense to have Jeter at short and A-Rod at third.
Now, onto part 2. Both Jeter and ARod were good enough hitters a few years ago to play any position (and still are). The point then, is that you need to get both of them in the lineup, and set up the defense so that it is as good as possible. If ARod's a better hitter than Jeter, and a better fielder, then he's just a better player. That's all there is to it.
This gets to my response in 81: A-Rod being better than Jeter at short doesn't necessarily mean that A-Rod at short and Jeter at third is the best possible defensive alignment.
And by this argument it makes more sense to have Jeter at short and A-Rod at third.
This isn't really an argument, though, because both players easily hit enough to hold down third base. Your point about the best possible defensive alignment is valid, although I think it would have been worth trying both players at third to actually find out which alignment was better.
Mmm, no.
If it's a given that both Jeter and A-Rod are going to be in your lineup, and it's another given that short and third are the spots they're going to be playing, then the best defensive alingment these two present at short and third is the one and only consideration to bear on which one plays short and which one plays third. Their hitting is at this point irrelevant, once it's determined that they're both playing.
But you should. That would be awesome!
As for changes in the times, there have been many, but the elderly's complete and utter disrespect for youth is one routine that has amazing staying power.
In that connection, I note that, apparently, sending a text message from your wife's phone to her ex-boyfriend that says "suck it" after you have killed your wife turns out not to be the best of ideas.
Which is why I've never understood the argument that Player X hits well enough to play short but not well enough to play left. If you have the lineup you want, and the cumulative offense and defense of that lineup, regardless of the distribution, is competitive, then what difference does it make where those individual players are positioned? If the most logical defensive alignment puts a weaker hitter in left, what difference? It feels like the big picture view of the collective team concept is getting lost in these assessments of where individual players "can" play based on their offensive production. I'm sure I'm not saying anything that hasn't been said before in response to this, and maybe there's a logical response that I haven't seen, but I haven't seen it and I don't intuitively grasp it.
Well, the ARod/Jeter situation then is a bad example, because it's a case in which both players were so good they were obviously going to play, and the only question was which one moves to third.
But the vast majority of teams aren't in a situation anything like that. The vast majority of teams DON'T "have the lineup they want," and for the vast majority of teams, "the cumulative offense and defense of the lineup" ISN'T optimally competitive. The vast majority of teams are continually struggling with issues of talent scarcity, mixing and matching the strengths and weaknesses of players who aren't so good as to be guaranteed a starting job.
And in this circumstance, compromises must be made. If you want a good fielder to play shortstop, second base, or center field, you're almost certainly going to have to sacrifice some offense, because players who can handle those positions defensively and still hit like 230-pound first basemen are in short supply. If this weren't the case, every team would just fill their roster with a bunch of power-hitting brutes and not worry about where they played defensively, but in real life such a team would surrender more runs on defense than they generate on offense.
What all this boils down to is the practical reality that the offensive barrier to entry to being a major league middle infielder/center fielder is lower than that for a first baseman/corner outfielder, and conversely the defensive barrier to entry is lower at the corners than it is up the middle. Maximizing team production within an environment of sub-optimal talent supply requires focusing players into the positions at which their strengths will be leveraged and their weaknesses sheltered, to the degree possible.
Now, of course, if one thinks Jeter's skills will translate worse to 3B than A-Rod's, then it's perfectly reasonable to have the worse defender at SS. But this is the general principle if we assume that players' skill sets translate equally.
To answer this specifically in the above vein, it's much easier to overcome offensive deficiency at shortstop than LF, because the coefficient applied to your defensive skill is higher. If your optimal defensive alignment of 8 players had a bad hitter in LF and a better hitter at SS, it's just statistically likely that you could find a better LF option because the defensive coefficient in LF is so low that improving that player's hitting at the cost of LF defense is almost certainly possible.
It doesn't. The point is more that Player X hits well enough to be a good player at shortstop, but doesn't hit well enough to be a good player in left field. Let's take someone more like Alex Cora, than Alex Rodriguez. Alex Cora in his prime was a tremendous defensive shortstop and second baseman, and had a few years where he got on base enough to be a decent overall offensive player, but usually was well below average offensively. If have no doubt that if he had been given a spring training to work on playing the outfield, he'd have been an outstanding defensive left fielder. The problem is that most of the plays a left fielder handles are routine. Cora might catch one ball a week that someone like Jeremy Hermida (just to pick an all-around somewhat below average left fielder) would miss. That wouldn't come close to the offensive difference between them. At shortstop, on the other hand, Cora might make three plays a week that someone like Hermida wouldn't make. That would make Cora more valuable.
Now on an occasional basis, just because of the talent around, a team might put a so-so hitter at a hitter's position because they don't have a guy who's an overall better fit for that position. But in the long run, that guy is either someone who needs to move to a more defense-oriented position (if he's a good enough fielder), or just be outright replaced with a better player.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main