Well, see, I'm not trying to pick a fight or anything, but you did make the point that he gets on base.
I don't watch the Cards. Had you said he is perfect because he does what they ask of him - he keeps a .980+ fielding percentage at three different positions - then I wouldn't have argued.
His OBP is just bad bad bad though, and really, you have to ask for more power from the corners of your infield, don't you? I know the Cards have power everywhere, but it seems like you need more than 3 dongs from the 3rd baseman per year.
Sure, if we could have someone who hits for more power it would be great. But, I like Polanco and think he does a good job. Yeah, they could probably trade for Rolen, but they would be stupid to give up what the Phillies want for him.
Well, see, defensively Polanco has it over Nevin in terms of fielding % and Errors. Phil had almost as many errors last season as Polanco has in his 4 year career (limited playing time, mind you in those 4 years) and the .930 fielding % vs .980 is a pretty big difference, isn't it? I have to admit thats a stat that doesnt readily jump to mind with a benchmark for "good" - you know, 30 hr, .300 hitter, etc... whats a good fielding %? I know they are always pretty high...
I believe anything 980 and above is Gold Glove Caliber. Though I really have no real idea. .930 is what *I* would call a mediocre at most fielder. But, again, I may be wrong. You'd have to get another opinion on that.
I believe that defense is extremely underrated in baseball. A lot of games are won and lost by defense. For example, in the Stl./Arz. Divisional Series, there were some plays mad by Zona that might just have saved the game for them. Or another example is Jeter's play in game 3 vs. Oakland. Or an example of bad defense losing a game would be Mariano Rivera throwing the ball into center field in game 7 of the World Series. I'm not saying defense is everything, but it is more than some fans think.
And don't worry about picking fights. I LOVE to talk baseball.
I've always been a strict believer that power doesn't necessarily have to win ballgames - if the speed and defense are there, then a team stands a chance. Of course, pitching is always a necessary component.
I can explain my reasoning later if it is so wished, but the best example that I would have to refute the power argument would be the early Rockie teams. Granted, they had very little pitching as well, and I am aware of that, but power does not necessarily make the game; it can come and go pretty much whenever it wants to. Is it useful? Sure; however, it's not required for success.
Well, so would I, Pieman. Rolen would be a great player to have. BUT, I'd rather not have to give up Bud Smith/Albert Pujols AND Darryl Kile for him. The Phillies are on cracK if they believe he is worth that much.
Actually, I don't think the Royals are all that bad. I really like the way they bring up their hitters. Of course, they wind up losing the hitters innevitably. Pitching is their weakness. (Which of course just 8 years ago was their strength.)
They know how to play the running game which is something that's near and dear to my heart, but the pitchers can't find the plate without a road map. If they could get themselves a couple of quality veterans (IE: A couple of guys who aren't neccessarily #1's, but 2 #2's is NEVER bad) and work with the youngsters, they may be able to turn out a 2nd or 3rd place finish.
Unfortunately, with the free spending Indians, and the manic depressive White Sox (always up and down) it's gonna be damn near impossible for them to make any kind of run for the top of the division for a long time to come - unless some generous billionaire with nothing better to do comes into their lives which isn't bloody likely in KC.
Manoman, there are so many things wrong with the Royals I don't know where to start.
Allard Baird has no clue as GM. Tony Muser has had 5 years to get it right and this team keeps getting worse.
Neifi Perez for Jermaine Dye. That's gonna work out well. Not.
Jeremy Giambi for Blake Stein. Yeah, that worked out well.
Signing Knoblauch and Tucker. Oh boy.
The Royals haven't been good in more than a dozen years. Hoping that all their young pitching develops at once is such a stupid proposition. Then put a bunch of hitters out there that wouldn't take a walk if their life depended on it.
A lifetime Royals fan and very depressed about it.
He's Rolie Polie Olie - and in his world of curves and curls, he's the swellest kid around.
You know who else threw a no-hitter as a rookie? Wilson Alvarez. So uh, yeah. I wouldn't put much stock in that.
Smith, even in his no-hitter, didn't blow me away the way that Kerry Wood did in '98 or Roy Oswalt did last season. He seemed like your average No. 3 starter that'll get 15 wins in a good year and 10-12 most other seasons.
His fastball was something like 86 most of that game, which won't cut it unless he has outstanding breaking stuff. He had one backdoor curve during the no-no that knocked my socks off, but outside of that, nothing really.
Well, the reason that they blew you away was that they threw hard. Big deal. Throwing hard is not everything. Just look at Maddux and Glavine. And then look at the oft-injured Wood. What does THAT tell you?
Boone wouldn't have had all of those RBI if, say, Roger Cedeno was the M's leadoff hitter that year. I don't think you can apply all the same stats (like runs created) to a leadoff guy that apply to a 3 or 4-hitter.