And neither statement is true. So you went 0-2 on 1 commentOriginally Posted by Johnny Fan
And neither statement is true. So you went 0-2 on 1 comment
Without Choo Reds won the division with Stubbs in CF, we added Choo and finished in 3rd. Exactly how valuable was he?
So you think by adding a better player by ANY stretch of the imagination is a downgrade?
Here. Go to the big board and tell them that Stubbs is more valuablke thab Choo because they finished 3rd with Choo and see what feedback you get.
No, I think you have to evaluate when the season is over what value that player brought to the team. Adding Choo was nice, it was fun to watch him play in cincy, but when all is said and done, were the Reds a better team last year over say 2012 with him on the Team? How many wins did the team have in 2012 compared to 2013? That is all that matters.
Dumbest argument ever.
So winning isn't the objective? Wow
OF COURSE IT IS. But to say a BETTER player who had a BETTER year is the reason from going to 1st to 3rd in the division is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. PLEASE justify what Stubbs brought that made him more valuable than Choo.So winning isn't the objective? Wow
I cant believe GMs arent lining up for Drew Stubbs.
I don't think the 2012 Reds were better than the 2013 Reds. The 2013 Reds just didn't have as much go right for them and we also had more competition in the division. Oh, we also didn't have the Astros.
Well the Indians traded for him, and now the Rockies did, so teams want him. Never said Choo didn't have a great year he did and the Rangers proved that buy paying him a boat load. However did his addition to the Reds make them a "overall" better team? The record and performance doesn't reflect that. You can't seem to seperate the two. Choo is a great player, but his addition to the Reds in 2013 did not make them a overall better team.
Yes. I can seperate it. I can say with out Choo they are probably a team that doesnt make the wild card play in game.
Let me ask you this. I assume you think Mariano Duncan is more valuable to the reds than Brandon Phillips ever was. Correct?
For a specific season I would say yes, but for an overall career with the Reds we will have to wait and see.
So NOW its not about winning WS?
We have to wait and see what happens with Phillips career with the Reds overall. We know what happen during Duncan's tenure, Phillips career isn't over yet with the Reds. IF he was say traded before the start of the season then overall value to the Reds I would put Duncan over Phillips.
LOL.
You know why you don't use stats like W-L or RBI to evaluate a player's value? Because they're largely affected by other variables... many other variables than the player's performance alone.
RBIs are solely a reflection of where you bat in the lineup. You think BP would have had more than 100 RBIs if he hit 2nd all year? What about 6th or 7th?
W-L are largely affected by your team's offense (run support) and your team's defense. That's why stat's like ERA+ and FIP/xFIP are more a reflection of the pitcher's value.
Homer Bailey, in today's market, would command at least 15MM AAV. He'd get a much better deal than Kyle Lohse got last year (11MM AAV) simply because he's younger, but also due to market inflation. But keep thinking the Reds can extend him for 4/52... that's a nice little pipe dream.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
