Originally Posted by AvesIce51
I dont think this is unknown. Freel does wear down. It has happened it probably would again. Plus, it's not like he isn't valuable when he doesn't start. He came in off the bench on Sunday, walked and scored. It's not like other players that are only good when they start. He is very valuable off the bench too. Of course I would like to start him a lot, but I would rather have a healthy Freel at the end of the season.
Where do you get this idea from? Freel had more at bats in September of '05 than in any other month. The same was true in 2004. If he was worn down, why so many at bats?
I understand he was valuable off of the bench on Sunday, but why does that mean he wouldn't have been much more valuable if he had started? If he walked and scored in one plate appearance, wouldn't he be more valuable if he could do that in 4 or 5?
I don't understand all of this "we have to save Freel from himself" rhetoric. It's not based in reality, and it has the potential to lose games for this team.