Originally Posted by RedEye
No one said Ludwick was a complete hack out there. Keri just suggested that Heisey was better -- which makes sense since he can cover all three OF positions if necessary. I don't think we have any way to quantify "professionalism" or "clubhouse presence" in such a way that invalidates his argument either.
Again, Keri's not arguing that Heisey is BETTER than Ludwick -- only that he's a pretty darn good replacement, all things considered.
Well, if you look at the evidence, it actually isn't that absurd. If anything Ludwick is the true "journeyman" in the equation -- older and more well-traveled with two really good seasons and a bunch of mediocre ones, signed in Spring Training at the last minute. Heisey has only ever played for one team. I'm not inclined to take your word for it over the evidence that is available.
I have no idea what you are basing this on except conjecture. More importantly, no one is saying that Chapman should pitch more innings -- only that he would be used in more strategically appropriate ones. Gossage is just a nifty historical comparison, but Keri admits this will probably never happen, so we might as well end the discussion. I just thought it was an interesting idea.
1. And what "evidence" is Kerri offering that heisey is "a
a pretty darn good replacement". You're using words like "evidence" and "conjecture" when they don't really apply.
2. "no one is saying that Chapman should pitch more innings"
what he's saying.
"But giving Chapman a true fireman's role, where he could come in with the bases loaded in a tie game in the seventh inning, douse a rally, then pitch multiple innings
at a time in the vein of peak Goose Gossage, could greatly enhance his value. "