***OFFICIAL*** FFA MLB Draft (3 Viewers)

[Mr. Pickles]

Plus, Larry, there are a couple more Shortstops that can give you solid D and some very good offense. Even if not ungodly numbers year in and year out.I figured it would be better to START the SS run, then get caught looking at the guys who may be in the HOF, but only because the only SS to hit a lick was named Honus, up until Banks came a long (ok, Arky was awesome, and there are a couple others, I have to put in these disclaimers because anything said with even a bit of facetiousness gets quickly torn to threads here).

I have a Shortstop in mind... I'm not sure though, since I don't really like him... lol

Lemme guess.. BJ Upton?

 

[larry_boy_44]

Plus, Larry, there are a couple more Shortstops that can give you solid D and some very good offense.  Even if not ungodly numbers year in and year out.I figured it would be better to START the SS run, then get caught looking at the guys who may be in the HOF, but only because the only SS to hit a lick was named Honus, up until Banks came a long (ok, Arky was awesome, and there are a couple others, I have to put in these disclaimers because anything said with even a bit of facetiousness gets quickly torn to threads here).

I have a Shortstop in mind... I'm not sure though, since I don't really like him... lol

Lemme guess.. BJ Upton?

no

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Plus, Larry, there are a couple more Shortstops that can give you solid D and some very good offense. Even if not ungodly numbers year in and year out.I figured it would be better to START the SS run, then get caught looking at the guys who may be in the HOF, but only because the only SS to hit a lick was named Honus, up until Banks came a long (ok, Arky was awesome, and there are a couple others, I have to put in these disclaimers because anything said with even a bit of facetiousness gets quickly torn to threads here).

I have a Shortstop in mind... I'm not sure though, since I don't really like him... lol

Lemme guess.. BJ Upton?

no

lmao at you answering this.

 

[Capella]

Arod was a bit of a reach there, personally...quite a few shortstops I want in front of him.That said, no shock he was taken.

 

[Sammy3469]

I knew A-Rod would probably go around this point, but I think it's way too early.

Agreed...I just want to add that we aren't projected A-rod's career into the future. Having said that, I think his numbers were terribly inflated playing in Arlington Park. I think the past years numbers in Yankee stadium are more indicative of what he'll put up the rest of his career. I just want to add, drafting the current guys on Wins Shares is a huge cop-out( and it's not just A-rod). I think 20 years from now we'll look back at the late 90's and all these guys shares will be adjusted back down. I'm sure he'll do fine in the sim and all, but I hope FFA voters punish anybody who relies on them too much.

 

[Koya]

Pick, it may have gotten lost in the flying Ham, but I asked you why you think A Rod is "way too soon" (my opinion is there is no way he should have dropped, a player that has the following "like batters" through age 28 - while playing a far more defensive position than most, seems to be far more a value by numbers/stats (even considering todays great hitters era) than a lack thereof.

Here are the players that were most similar through 28:

Ken Griffey Jr. (816)

Mel Ott (779) *

Mickey Mantle (772) *

Hank Aaron (765) *

Frank Robinson (747) *

Eddie Mathews (745) *

Jimmie Foxx (723) *

XXX (696)

XXX (687) *

Johnny Bench (687) *

Arod is most similar to another player that seems underated because of his era (Griff) followed by some of the greatest Legends not named Ruth.

A GG Shortstop that bats like Griffey, Ott, Mantle, Aaaron and F Robinson as the 5 "most similar" batters is pretty telling, I would think.

Curious to know why you seem so adamantly against the pick, even if you thought that is where he would go in the draft.

edit to add.. I just realized, EVERY one of those players in the Hall except for one, that will go in first year of eligibility.

 

[Koya]

I knew A-Rod would probably go around this point, but I think it's way too early.

Agreed

See my above post. I dont know what would be reason for not having A Rod up there withe the best ever. He had a full decade at short, so we have plenty good enough sample. tia, curious to know!

 

[Capella]

for kicks, I'll give some of James' rankings from his Abstract. Obviously won't mention undrafted players (unless Negro Leaguers)1. Babe2. Wagner3. Mays :stillers:4. Oscar Charleston5. Cobb6. Mantle7. Williams8. Johnson9. Josh Gibson10. Musial (hmmm)11. Speaker12. Aaron13. Joe D14. Gehrig15. Morgan16. Bonds17. Paige18. Collins19. Grove20. AlexanderHe makes an absolutely shocking statement in his rankings about a player I don't think will be drafted for another 5 rounds, and has Koufax down as the #10 SP and #51 overall.

 

[Capella]

Pick, it may have gotten lost in the flying Ham, but I asked you why you think A Rod is "way too soon" (my opinion is there is no way he should have dropped, a player that has the following "like batters" through age 28 - while playing a far more defensive position than most, seems to be far more a value by numbers/stats (even considering todays great hitters era) than a lack thereof.

Here are the players that were most similar through 28:

Ken Griffey Jr. (816)

Mel Ott (779) *

Mickey Mantle (772) *

Hank Aaron (765) *

Frank Robinson (747) *

Eddie Mathews (745) *

Jimmie Foxx (723) *

XXX (696)

XXX (687) *

Johnny Bench (687) *

Arod is most similar to another player that seems underated because of his era (Griff) followed by some of the greatest Legends not named Ruth.

A GG Shortstop that bats like Griffey, Ott, Mantle, Aaaron and F Robinson as the 5 "most similar" batters is pretty telling, I would think.

Curious to know why you seem so adamantly against the pick, even if you thought that is where he would go in the draft.

edit to add.. I just realized, EVERY one of those players in the Hall except for one, that will go in first year of eligibility.

difference is, all their careers are finished and we know where we can argue them on a historical perspective.Like your Lebron selection, you are arguing that present success is indicitive of future success as well. It may be, but none of us know. ARod could go down tomorrow and be done. And his present career doesn't justify his draft position.

 

[Sammy3469]

see above, I think a lot of his stats for his time in Texas were a function of the stadium, and I know at least (Neyer, I think) projected that he wouldn't do as well in Yankee stadium. I think a good anology for all these guys is Todd Helton. He has the gaudy stats and Win shares for Colorado, but does it really mean anything?

 

[Koya]

for kicks, I'll give some of James' rankings from his Abstract. Obviously won't mention undrafted players (unless Negro Leaguers)1. Babe2. Wagner3. Mays :stillers:4. Oscar Charleston5. Cobb6. Mantle7. Williams8. Johnson9. Josh Gibson10. Musial (hmmm)11. Speaker12. Aaron13. Joe D14. Gehrig15. Morgan16. Bonds17. Paige18. Collins19. Grove20. AlexanderHe makes an absolutely shocking statement in his rankings about a player I don't think will be drafted for another 5 rounds, and has Koufax down as the #10 SP and #51 overall.

What most surprises me is his lack of care for pitching. Look at how low pitchers are. this makes me wonder - perhaps his is a great strategy to compare all time players... but not tell who are the best players to win a championship?i.e... most believe pitching trumps hitting, all else being close to equal. in the regular season, the fact is a pitcher only helps 1/5 times (maybe 1/4 in the old days). However, that can change to 1/2 to 1/3 in the post season. Now, a dominating arm can win a game, on its own. This may be further evidenced by the A's ansd they will be a good case study. Using the metrics theories, the A's seem to believe Hudson, Mulder and Zito were just along for their metric ride. Now, they have gotten rid of the three great arms and we will see how money ball does, without them.However, excluding his strong preference for position players, I find James' list to be pretty helpful and insightful. I just ignore the fact that he places so little value on pitching (just my preference).PS I think I know the player you are talking about who wont be drafted for a while. He also might be a safety valve for about 5 of us lol.

 

[Capella]

Pick, it may have gotten lost in the flying Ham, but I asked you why you think A Rod is "way too soon" (my opinion is there is no way he should have dropped, a player that has the following "like batters" through age 28 - while playing a far more defensive position than most, seems to be far more a value by numbers/stats (even considering todays great hitters era) than a lack thereof.

Here are the players that were most similar through 28:

Ken Griffey Jr. (816)

Mel Ott (779) *

Mickey Mantle (772) *

Hank Aaron (765) *

Frank Robinson (747) *

Eddie Mathews (745) *

Jimmie Foxx (723) *

XXX (696)

XXX (687) *

Johnny Bench (687) *

Arod is most similar to another player that seems underated because of his era (Griff) followed by some of the greatest Legends not named Ruth.

A GG Shortstop that bats like Griffey, Ott, Mantle, Aaaron and F Robinson as the 5 "most similar" batters is pretty telling, I would think.

Curious to know why you seem so adamantly against the pick, even if you thought that is where he would go in the draft.

edit to add.. I just realized, EVERY one of those players in the Hall except for one, that will go in first year of eligibility.

difference is, all their careers are finished and we know where we can argue them on a historical perspective.Like your Lebron selection, you are arguing that present success is indicitive of future success as well. It may be, but none of us know. ARod could go down tomorrow and be done. And his present career doesn't justify his draft position.

btw, that's the reason the '94 rule is in play..or else, we'd all have to hear how Pujols and Prior project out, how they're just as good as Hall of Famers at their age, blah blah blah.Should've made it '84.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Pick, it may have gotten lost in the flying Ham, but I asked you why you think A Rod is "way too soon" (my opinion is there is no way he should have dropped, a player that has the following "like batters" through age 28 - while playing a far more defensive position than most, seems to be far more a value by numbers/stats (even considering todays great hitters era) than a lack thereof.

Here are the players that were most similar through 28:

Ken Griffey Jr. (816)

Mel Ott (779) *

Mickey Mantle (772) *

Hank Aaron (765) *

Frank Robinson (747) *

Eddie Mathews (745) *

Jimmie Foxx (723) *

XXX (696)

XXX (687) *

Johnny Bench (687) *

Arod is most similar to another player that seems underated because of his era (Griff) followed by some of the greatest Legends not named Ruth.

A GG Shortstop that bats like Griffey, Ott, Mantle, Aaaron and F Robinson as the 5 "most similar" batters is pretty telling, I would think.

Curious to know why you seem so adamantly against the pick, even if you thought that is where he would go in the draft.

edit to add.. I just realized, EVERY one of those players in the Hall except for one, that will go in first year of eligibility.

This is all well and good, the draft is a career assessment. I agree that A-Rod is on pace to be perhaps #2 all-time at SS, and maybe #1 if he has a few more ridiculous seasons, but as of right now, he doesn't deserve to be ranked as highly as you have him. To put things in perspective regarding his win shares (a stat you seem to love with unrelenting passion), yes he has racked up a good number of them, but with the Yankees in '04 he had 28 which was good for fifth.. on his own team.

I'm as much of an A-Rod fan as anyone, but I think people need to temper their enthusiasm when comparing guys who are in the prime of their careers with guys having 15-20 years under their belt. It might do you well in the simulation, but there's something to be said for racking up big numbers over time and not just in bunches.

 

[Koya]

Pick, it may have gotten lost in the flying Ham, but I asked you why you think A Rod is "way too soon" (my opinion is there is no way he should have dropped, a player that has the following "like batters" through age 28 - while playing a far more defensive position than most, seems to be far more a value by numbers/stats (even considering todays great hitters era) than a lack thereof.

Here are the players that were most similar through 28:

Ken Griffey Jr. (816)

Mel Ott (779) *

Mickey Mantle (772) *

Hank Aaron (765) *

Frank Robinson (747) *

Eddie Mathews (745) *

Jimmie Foxx (723) *

XXX (696)

XXX (687) *

Johnny Bench (687) *

Arod is most similar to another player that seems underated because of his era (Griff) followed by some of the greatest Legends not named Ruth.

A GG Shortstop that bats like Griffey, Ott, Mantle, Aaaron and F Robinson as the 5 "most similar" batters is pretty telling, I would think.

Curious to know why you seem so adamantly against the pick, even if you thought that is where he would go in the draft.

edit to add.. I just realized, EVERY one of those players in the Hall except for one, that will go in first year of eligibility.

difference is, all their careers are finished and we know where we can argue them on a historical perspective.Like your Lebron selection, you are arguing that present success is indicitive of future success as well. It may be, but none of us know. ARod could go down tomorrow and be done. And his present career doesn't justify his draft position.

Cap - this is VERY different from Lebron. While Arod may have some numbers suffer, he also will help other numbers (i.e. when we look back at a Shortstop with 600 HRs for example).I am taking the future out of this COMPLETELY as it has no play, unless we are talking "end of career numbers" - in that case, average may suffer a little, HRs and RBIs will pile up, the others could go up or down.

That said, during a full decade at the position, A Rod did things no one else ever did at that position.

Also, the players that we are comparing against are ALL thorugh the age of 28. This is completely apples to apples. How was Mantle through 28? Very close to A Rod. Same with Ott and Frank Robinson. I think that is a fair and objective measure. This has only to do with what A Rod has already done and nothing to do with what he may, or may not do.

The ballpark arguement may hold something... but what about those seattle years?

His current career of 381 HRs, MVP, top 5 MVP placing, top producer at his positoin by FAR for a decade, .381 OBP.. I could go on... you do not think that constitutes hall of fame?

In just 10 years, he rose to #2 all time Win Shares at SS, as well.

 

[Sammy3469]

Pick, it may have gotten lost in the flying Ham, but I asked you why you think A Rod is "way too soon" (my opinion is there is no way he should have dropped, a player that has the following "like batters" through age 28 - while playing a far more defensive position than most, seems to be far more a value by numbers/stats (even considering todays great hitters era) than a lack thereof.

Here are the players that were most similar through 28:

Ken Griffey Jr. (816)

Mel Ott (779) *

Mickey Mantle (772) *

Hank Aaron (765) *

Frank Robinson (747) *

Eddie Mathews (745) *

Jimmie Foxx (723) *

XXX (696)

XXX (687) *

Johnny Bench (687) *

Arod is most similar to another player that seems underated because of his era (Griff) followed by some of the greatest Legends not named Ruth.

A GG Shortstop that bats like Griffey, Ott, Mantle, Aaaron and F Robinson as the 5 "most similar" batters is pretty telling, I would think.

Curious to know why you seem so adamantly against the pick, even if you thought that is where he would go in the draft.

edit to add.. I just realized, EVERY one of those players in the Hall except for one, that will go in first year of eligibility.

difference is, all their careers are finished and we know where we can argue them on a historical perspective.Like your Lebron selection, you are arguing that present success is indicitive of future success as well. It may be, but none of us know. ARod could go down tomorrow and be done. And his present career doesn't justify his draft position.

btw, that's the reason the '94 rule is in play..or else, we'd all have to hear how Pujols and Prior project out, how they're just as good as Hall of Famers at their age, blah blah blah.Should've made it '84.

You should have made it 90 to exclude a bunch of guys whose best years are right now.

 

[larry_boy_44]

Pick, it may have gotten lost in the flying Ham, but I asked you why you think A Rod is "way too soon" (my opinion is there is no way he should have dropped, a player that has the following "like batters" through age 28 - while playing a far more defensive position than most, seems to be far more a value by numbers/stats (even considering todays great hitters era) than a lack thereof.

Here are the players that were most similar through 28:

Ken Griffey Jr. (816)

Mel Ott (779) *

Mickey Mantle (772) *

Hank Aaron (765) *

Frank Robinson (747) *

Eddie Mathews (745) *

Jimmie Foxx (723) *

XXX (696)

XXX  (687) *

Johnny Bench (687) *

Arod is most similar to another player that seems underated because of his era (Griff) followed by some of the greatest Legends not named Ruth. 

A GG Shortstop that bats like Griffey, Ott, Mantle, Aaaron and F Robinson as the 5 "most similar" batters is pretty telling, I would think.

Curious to know why you seem so adamantly against the pick, even if you thought that is where he would go in the draft.

edit to add.. I just realized, EVERY  one of those players in the Hall except for one, that will go in first year of eligibility.

difference is, all their careers are finished and we know where we can argue them on a historical perspective.Like your Lebron selection, you are arguing that present success is indicitive of future success as well. It may be, but none of us know. ARod could go down tomorrow and be done. And his present career doesn't justify his draft position.

btw, that's the reason the '94 rule is in play..or else, we'd all have to hear how Pujols and Prior project out, how they're just as good as Hall of Famers at their age, blah blah blah.Should've made it '84.

if A-Rod retired today, he has a very, VERY good chance to make the Hall of Fame...if Lebron retired today, he would have no chance...

 

[Koya]

This is all well and good, the draft is a career assessment. I agree that A-Rod is on pace to be perhaps #2 all-time at SS, and maybe #1 if he has a few more ridiculous seasons, but as of right now, he doesn't deserve to be ranked as highly as you have him.

To put things in perspective regarding his win shares (a stat you seem to love with unrelenting passion), yes he has racked up a good number of them, but with the Yankees in '04 he had 28 which was good for fifth.. on his own team.

I'm as much of an A-Rod fan as anyone, but I think people need to temper their enthusiasm when comparing guys who are in the prime of their careers with guys having 15-20 years under their belt. It might do you well in the simulation, but there's something to be said for racking up big numbers over time and not just in bunches.

Thanks for your insight pick.Personally, 10 years is not one "bunch" or even a few "bunches" - when a player excels for a straight decade, in my estimation that is a very good sample size.

I find it a little ironic, because you claim to really like A Rod - and I am not that big a fan.

(1) He has produced his numbers in a hitters era (although he is still one of the top 5 hitters of his time, at SS)

(2) He is a freaking yankee.

(3) see #2

I agree his career pace had him easily at #2, and possibly treading on Honus territory (I dont think he would have made it) but many felt he arrived at #2 all time in his 10 years over there already. Personally, I can see an arguement for Arky Vaughn and maybe Banks along with one other - and they were taking a while earlier in the draft.

baseball seems to be the rare sport where modern players are put at a disadvantege until they have retired for a few years before putting them on par with the greats. I admit to doing this myself.. holding the numbers of mays and ruth and even speaker and wagner with such great regard as to sometimes be untouchable.

Of course, modern play makes that even harder because the numbers are skewed nowadays.

 

[Koya]

Pick, it may have gotten lost in the flying Ham, but I asked you why you think A Rod is "way too soon" (my opinion is there is no way he should have dropped, a player that has the following "like batters" through age 28 - while playing a far more defensive position than most, seems to be far more a value by numbers/stats (even considering todays great hitters era) than a lack thereof.

Here are the players that were most similar through 28:

Ken Griffey Jr. (816)

Mel Ott (779) *

Mickey Mantle (772) *

Hank Aaron (765) *

Frank Robinson (747) *

Eddie Mathews (745) *

Jimmie Foxx (723) *

XXX (696)

XXX  (687) *

Johnny Bench (687) *

Arod is most similar to another player that seems underated because of his era (Griff) followed by some of the greatest Legends not named Ruth. 

A GG Shortstop that bats like Griffey, Ott, Mantle, Aaaron and F Robinson as the 5 "most similar" batters is pretty telling, I would think.

Curious to know why you seem so adamantly against the pick, even if you thought that is where he would go in the draft.

edit to add.. I just realized, EVERY  one of those players in the Hall except for one, that will go in first year of eligibility.

difference is, all their careers are finished and we know where we can argue them on a historical perspective.Like your Lebron selection, you are arguing that present success is indicitive of future success as well. It may be, but none of us know. ARod could go down tomorrow and be done. And his present career doesn't justify his draft position.

btw, that's the reason the '94 rule is in play..or else, we'd all have to hear how Pujols and Prior project out, how they're just as good as Hall of Famers at their age, blah blah blah.Should've made it '84.

You should have made it 90 to exclude a bunch of guys whose best years are right now.

Yeah - I specifically asked Cappy if A Rod was eligible because I wanted to avoid the debate on future performance. this is only about what Arod has done to date - which places him in absolute elite company. there are players IN the Hall of Fame that have had less great years than A Rod (well, at least around the same) and at least we "expect" A Rod to keep going. Even if he did not, he would likely make the hall.however, when I found out that A Rod was eligible and 10+ years is enough to judge on, I hardly think it is fair to say his career is incomplete and we can not judge him.

ARod will go far more up compared to down than say a Pedro.. but no one mentioned Pedro's EXPECTED decline.

Fact is., we have someone that for years showed he can be a lead leader in power, vie for a batting title, play solid GG defense, steal some bases, score and ton, hit a ton of RBIs.... simply put, one of the best SS's ever.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

The ballpark arguement may hold something... but what about those seattle years?

Yeah, what about them? They played in the hitter-friendly Kingdome until 2000. A-Rod got the hell out of Dodge shortly thereafter.

 

[Koya]

Cappy - this is why I asked.

 

[Koya]

The ballpark arguement may hold something... but what about those seattle years?

Yeah, what about them? They played in the hitter-friendly Kingdome until 2000. A-Rod got the hell out of Dodge shortly thereafter.

But was it as skewing to the #'s as Texas, is my question?edit to add: This is A Rods one year in Safeco, full year. Seems he went for a little less power, and therefore had an OBP of .420 - to go with 40 HRs and 130+ RBIs. So the ballpark arguement doesnt seem to hold all of the answers, even though it certainly has some effect.

2000 24 SEA AL 148GP .316 .420 .606 41HR 132RBI 134 RS 100W

That is NOT a hitters park, and is coming from a SS that has two GG.

 

[Sammy3469]

LOL Paging Mr. Banks there is an argument you may want to get into in the FFA. By the time Banks was 28 he had already put up 4 40 hr seasons and had 2 MVPs. That's in 4 fewer years, also

 

[Koya]

LOL Paging Mr. Banks there is an argument you may want to get into in the FFA. By the time Banks was 28 he had already put up 4 40 hr seasons and had 2 MVPs. That's in 4 fewer years, also

Banks is an all time great player. I do not discount that.A Rod is also an all time great player. The fact that he is still playing does not change that fact.Banks also went considerably sooner in this draft... do you really think he brings that much (if any) more to the SS table during the same times in their careers, as A Rod?I LOVE Banks too (would rather he was on my team because the guy is so solid). But Banks' greatness does not diminish A Rods. Banks is the ONLY other SS EVER to compare to A Rod (Wagner is a different player in a league of his very own)

 

[Koya]

Banks 10 Years at SS

1954 23 CHC NL 154 593 70 163 19 7 19 79 6 10 40 50 .275 .326 .427 1955 24

1955 24 CHC NL 154 596 98 176 29 9 44 117 9 3 45 72 .295 .345 .596

1956 25 CHC NL 139 538 82 160 25 8 28 85 6 9 52 62 .297 .358 .530

1957 26 CHC NL 156 594 113 169 34 6 43 102 8 4 70 85 .285 .360 .579

1958 27 CHC NL 154 617 119 193 23 11 47 129 4 4 52 87 .313 .366 .614

1959 28 CHC NL 155 589 97 179 25 6 45 143 2 4 64 72 .304 .374 .596

1960 29 CHC NL 156 597 94 162 32 7 41 117 1 3 71 69 .271 .350 .554

1961 30 CHC NL 138 511 75 142 22 4 29 80 1 2 54 75 .278 .346 .507

1962 31 CHC NL 154 610 87 164 20 6 37 104 5 1 30 71 .269 .306 .503

1963 32 CHC NL 130 432 41 98 20 1 18 64 0 3 39 73 .227 .292 .403

ARod 10 years at SS:

1994 18 SEA AL 17 54 4 11 0 0 0 2 3 0 3 20 .204 .241 .204

1995 19 SEA AL 48 142 15 33 6 2 5 19 4 2 6 42 .232 .264 .408

1996 20 SEA AL 146 601 141 215 54 1 36 123 15 4 59 104 .358 .414 .631

1997 21 SEA AL 141 587 100 176 40 3 23 84 29 6 41 99 .300 .350 .496

1998 22 SEA AL 161 686 123 213 35 5 42 124 46 13 45 121 .310 .360 .560

1999 23 SEA AL 129 502 110 143 25 0 42 111 21 7 56 109 .285 .357 .586

2000 24 SEA AL 148 554 134 175 34 2 41 132 15 4 100 121 .316 .420 .606

2001 25 TEX AL 162 632 133 201 34 1 52 135 18 3 75 131 .318 .399 .622

2002 26 TEX AL 162 624 125 187 27 2 57 142 9 4 87 122 .300 .392 .623

2003 27 TEX AL 161 607 124 181 30 6 47 118 17 3 87 126 .298 .396 .600

This is as good a debate as any (and I love Banks, too).

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Koya, dude.. don't be so defensive. Much like the Lefty pick, you're responding to every criticism like it's a personal affront. All I wanted to do was inject some contrary opinion here, which I think is warranted anytime you pick a guy who is pretty much in his prime.You mentioned "those Seattle years." Just wanted to clear up that he only spent one year in a pitcher's park in that time, which you apparently didn't realize.

 

[UCONN]

Cool sig. Koya. I'm gonna change my links from baseballreference to that site.

 

[UCONN]

Bad Joke Mantle once joked that once he died, if he got to heaven, God wouldn't let him in because of the wild life he had led. But as he turned to leave, God would say, "Before you go, would you sign six dozen baseball?" :rotflmao:

 

[Koya]

Koya, dude.. don't be so defensive. Much like the Lefty pick, you're responding to every criticism like it's a personal affront. All I wanted to do was inject some contrary opinion here, which I think is warranted anytime you pick a guy who is pretty much in his prime.You mentioned "those Seattle years." Just wanted to clear up that he only spent one year in a pitcher's park in that time, which you apparently didn't realize.

Pick - not defensive at all. Not sure why people think it is defensive... I think it is fun. Some people like some picks, others dont. I have my reasons why, so when you give a differing opinion, part of the fun of the draft is explaining reasoning.At the end of the day, sometimes I will say - I was really wrong about that player (i.e. Maddox) and sometimes I may show someone a player in a light where they change their minds.Not defensive at all, just having fun. Keep it coming!

 

[Koya]

Cool sig. Koya. I'm gonna change my links from baseballreference to that site.

Some great sights out there. ironically, it is hard to find good "write ups" like in the NBA draft.. lets face it, I want to know how a guy could run, throw, cover ground, deal with a tricky outfield, just as much as I want to know he went 40 HRs 5 times in his career. Baseball really does lend itself to numbers though much better than other sports.

 

[UCONN]

Cool sig. Koya. I'm gonna change my links from baseballreference to that site.

Some great sights out there. ironically, it is hard to find good "write ups" like in the NBA draft.. lets face it, I want to know how a guy could run, throw, cover ground, deal with a tricky outfield, just as much as I want to know he went 40 HRs 5 times in his career. Baseball really does lend itself to numbers though much better than other sports.

From that site...The 5-8-3 Double Play As a center fielder, Speaker played so shallow for most hitters that he was like a fifth infielder, swift of foot, chasing down potential singles. Twice in 1918, he executed an unassisted double play at second base, snaring low line drives on the run and then beating base runners to the bag. At least once in his career he was credited as the pivot man in a routine double play! Bill Carrigan, a longtime teammate of Speaker's on the Red Sox, often times would send a pickoff throw from his catcher's position to Speaker who had snuck in on second base. In addition, as Indians' manager he insisted the team practice a play where he from center field would cover the keystone sack on bunt plays, thus freeing up his shortstop to cover third, and his third baseman to charge the bunts.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Pick - not defensive at all. Not sure why people think it is defensive... I think it is fun.

The point is that you respond to every contrary opinion about your draft selections with rather long counter arguments. It's a little over the top.

 

[Koya]

Pick - not defensive at all. Not sure why people think it is defensive... I think it is fun.

The point is that you respond to every contrary opinion about your draft selections with rather long counter arguments. It's a little over the top.

Havent you figured out by now that those are short replies by me? I get long winded when there is not much else going on? Sorry if its over the top to you... certainly no need for you to reply to one of my long winded responses. Otherwise, Im always up to know others opinions on things.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Pick - not defensive at all. Not sure why people think it is defensive... I think it is fun.

The point is that you respond to every contrary opinion about your draft selections with rather long counter arguments. It's a little over the top.

Havent you figured out by now that those are short replies by me? I get long winded when there is not much else going on? Sorry if its over the top to you... certainly no need for you to reply to one of my long winded responses. Otherwise, Im always up to know others opinions on things.

Well, this is becoming a commentary on Koya's draft more than anything else.

 

[Koya]

Cool sig. Koya.  I'm gonna change my links from baseballreference to that site.

Some great sights out there. ironically, it is hard to find good "write ups" like in the NBA draft.. lets face it, I want to know how a guy could run, throw, cover ground, deal with a tricky outfield, just as much as I want to know he went 40 HRs 5 times in his career. Baseball really does lend itself to numbers though much better than other sports.

From that site...The 5-8-3 Double Play As a center fielder, Speaker played so shallow for most hitters that he was like a fifth infielder, swift of foot, chasing down potential singles. Twice in 1918, he executed an unassisted double play at second base, snaring low line drives on the run and then beating base runners to the bag. At least once in his career he was credited as the pivot man in a routine double play! Bill Carrigan, a longtime teammate of Speaker's on the Red Sox, often times would send a pickoff throw from his catcher's position to Speaker who had snuck in on second base. In addition, as Indians' manager he insisted the team practice a play where he from center field would cover the keystone sack on bunt plays, thus freeing up his shortstop to cover third, and his third baseman to charge the bunts.

Speaker did invent the shallow outfield in the modern era, as I understand it. He was also considered part of the top defensive outfield pre 1950... some would argue after as well. Then we get into the different gloves and all.

 

[UCONN]

Cool sig. Koya.  I'm gonna change my links from baseballreference to that site.

Some great sights out there. ironically, it is hard to find good "write ups" like in the NBA draft.. lets face it, I want to know how a guy could run, throw, cover ground, deal with a tricky outfield, just as much as I want to know he went 40 HRs 5 times in his career. Baseball really does lend itself to numbers though much better than other sports.

From that site...The 5-8-3 Double Play As a center fielder, Speaker played so shallow for most hitters that he was like a fifth infielder, swift of foot, chasing down potential singles. Twice in 1918, he executed an unassisted double play at second base, snaring low line drives on the run and then beating base runners to the bag. At least once in his career he was credited as the pivot man in a routine double play! Bill Carrigan, a longtime teammate of Speaker's on the Red Sox, often times would send a pickoff throw from his catcher's position to Speaker who had snuck in on second base. In addition, as Indians' manager he insisted the team practice a play where he from center field would cover the keystone sack on bunt plays, thus freeing up his shortstop to cover third, and his third baseman to charge the bunts.

Speaker did invent the shallow outfield in the modern era, as I understand it. He was also considered part of the top defensive outfield pre 1950... some would argue after as well. Then we get into the different gloves and all.

I'm starting to like that site...(on Speaker) " Generally regarded as the best defensive center fielder to ever play the game"Guess Mickey is gonna have to pull a Joe D move over.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

PM's down?

Still reading your email..Nice one, Kaczynski.

 

[Politician Spock]

Pick - not defensive at all. Not sure why people think it is defensive... I think it is fun.

The point is that you respond to every contrary opinion about your draft selections with rather long counter arguments. It's a little over the top.

Havent you figured out by now that those are short replies by me? I get long winded when there is not much else going on? Sorry if its over the top to you... certainly no need for you to reply to one of my long winded responses. Otherwise, Im always up to know others opinions on things.

Personally I prefer Koya's long winded posts, that may or may have something a value to consider, than I do the 3 to 4 page bickering arguments that have no value what so ever.

 

[Koya]

Pick - not defensive at all. Not sure why people think it is defensive... I think it is fun.

The point is that you respond to every contrary opinion about your draft selections with rather long counter arguments. It's a little over the top.

Havent you figured out by now that those are short replies by me? I get long winded when there is not much else going on? Sorry if its over the top to you... certainly no need for you to reply to one of my long winded responses. Otherwise, Im always up to know others opinions on things.

Well, this is becoming a commentary on Koya's draft more than anything else.

Ive asked a number of times to talk about other players. If someone doesnt reply to a question or point I have, then there will not be much dialogue on that topic and it will die. I put my pick up.. if someone wants to discuss, Im game. If soimeone wants to talk about their pick, or anothers, that is fine too.Should a discussion happen on anything baseball related, Im game. But if someone says specifically they like or dont like a pick of mine, I dont htink itsout of bounds to engage in a discussion on the topic. Besides, other than the Lefty talk with Nipsey (and we know the schtick), my team has not received much mention b/w Schmidt, Seaver and Griff. Now, we are talking about me talking about my players. So not sure where this leaves things.

 

[Koya]

PM's down?

there goes the neighborhood. Mr. Ham - are we going to get you involved as a team in one of these drafts? We can all pitch in, free Ham to the winner. (no free hams allowed to be sent to garner votes for your team, however)

 

[oso diablo]

my team has not received much mention b/w Schmidt, Seaver and Griff.

yours is the team to beat, thus far.

 

[larry_boy_44]

ok, since ya'll want discussion to be started...honestly what do you guys think of my team?

 

[UCONN]

ok, since ya'll want discussion to be started...honestly what do you guys think of my team?

I wouldn't have taken a player that has such a glaring weakness (no glove whatsoever) as early as you took Frank. It's hard to judge the teams because we are still very early in this thing.

 

[larry_boy_44]

ok, since ya'll want discussion to be started...honestly what do you guys think of my team?

I wouldn't have taken a player that has such a glaring weakness (no glove whatsoever) as early as you took Frank. It's hard to judge the teams because we are still very early in this thing.

I wish I had my next 2 picks... of course I'm not even 100% sure about the guys I'm looking at...I really wanted Griffey and A-Rod... I'd have a monster team if I had gotten them two guys...2. A-Rod3. Griffey4. Thomas...I wanted THAT lineup... }=O( *sad*

 

[Koya]

ok, since ya'll want discussion to be started...honestly what do you guys think of my team?

I wouldn't have taken a player that has such a glaring weakness (no glove whatsoever) as early as you took Frank. It's hard to judge the teams because we are still very early in this thing.

UCONN... when has common sense EVER stopped us from judging. larry let me take a peak, I am mesmerized by Freddie Mitchells PC and forgot the game was on!

 

[Mr. Pickles]

ok, since ya'll want discussion to be started...honestly what do you guys think of my team?

You took a DH. This is bad.

 

[Capella]

still don't like the ARod pick, but I'm going to drop it at that since the players I may want to compare him to are still available.Back to Arky Vaughan if we may..this is a guy that either a) I have completely underrated or b) history has made out to be better than he really is.I don't see it..James has him as the #2 SS of all time.Career .318 avg is nice. James claims that Vaughan's three best seasons in 34-36 were better than the three best of any SS other than Wagner. Hit .351 over that period, scored a hundred runs, lead the league in walks. Had an OBP in '35 of .491 which is pretty sick. Still..I think you could easily put Banks' 3-year stretch of '57-59 up against Arky and have no problem saying that his was better. Arky was not rated an exceptional defensive player, which I personally consider important at SS. According to James, he ranks in the bottom half in terms of defensive value. Banks was no better either. I just don't see how his offense is that much better than some others that it bumps up his mediocre defense. I don't know why, but I just refuse to see Arky Vaughan ranked so high both in terms of overall greatness and where he was drafted here. Nice hitter, had a few insane OBP years but I don't think his offensive production matches up with others, and his defense wasn't special. I dunno, maybe there aren't enough good shortstops. And I also don't know why I continue to talk about this guy when nobody cares.

 

[Capella]

ok, since ya'll want discussion to be started...honestly what do you guys think of my team?

I wouldn't have taken a player that has such a glaring weakness (no glove whatsoever) as early as you took Frank. It's hard to judge the teams because we are still very early in this thing.

I wish I had my next 2 picks... of course I'm not even 100% sure about the guys I'm looking at...I really wanted Griffey and A-Rod... I'd have a monster team if I had gotten them two guys...2. A-Rod3. Griffey4. Thomas...I wanted THAT lineup... }=O( *sad*

at some point, you're going to have to take a player that still isn't on an active roster.

 

[UCONN]

still don't like the ARod pick, but I'm going to drop it at that since the players I may want to compare him to are still available.Back to Arky Vaughan if we may..this is a guy that either a) I have completely underrated or b) history has made out to be better than he really is.I don't see it..James has him as the #2 SS of all time.Career .318 avg is nice. James claims that Vaughan's three best seasons in 34-36 were better than the three best of any SS other than Wagner. Hit .351 over that period, scored a hundred runs, lead the league in walks. Had an OBP in '35 of .491 which is pretty sick. Still..I think you could easily put Banks' 3-year stretch of '57-59 up against Arky and have no problem saying that his was better. Arky was not rated an exceptional defensive player, which I personally consider important at SS. According to James, he ranks in the bottom half in terms of defensive value. Banks was no better either. I just don't see how his offense is that much better than some others that it bumps up his mediocre defense. I don't know why, but I just refuse to see Arky Vaughan ranked so high both in terms of overall greatness and where he was drafted here. Nice hitter, had a few insane OBP years but I don't think his offensive production matches up with others, and his defense wasn't special. I dunno, maybe there aren't enough good shortstops. And I also don't know why I continue to talk about this guy when nobody cares.

It may have been a reach. I had a righty bat to set the table and wanted a lefty bat to set the table as well....obviously his OBP was the over-riding factor. The things I see have him ranked as an adequate (though not spectacular) defender. I'd already gotten 3 good gloves and was willing to make the sacrifice to get what I wanted in a hitter...I wouldn't have been comfortable hitting any of those great glvoes at the top of my order in an All-time line-up...and didn't want to get a #2 hitter out of a corner infielder, catcher, or outfielder. Reach or not his #2 ranking by Mr. James and his HOF induction certainly make him an all-time worthy player. That said certainly there is value at SS left and I'm sure some people that fill that position later are gonna be happy w/ said value.

 

[larry_boy_44]

ok, since ya'll want discussion to be started...honestly what do you guys think of my team?

I wouldn't have taken a player that has such a glaring weakness (no glove whatsoever) as early as you took Frank. It's hard to judge the teams because we are still very early in this thing.

I wish I had my next 2 picks... of course I'm not even 100% sure about the guys I'm looking at...I really wanted Griffey and A-Rod... I'd have a monster team if I had gotten them two guys...2. A-Rod3. Griffey4. Thomas...I wanted THAT lineup... }=O( *sad*

at some point, you're going to have to take a player that still isn't on an active roster.

my team is 50/50 right now...Mathewson and Gehringer are retired for a long time...Thomas and Clemens are on active rosters... of course they are both reaching the ends of thier careers very quickly being around since the late 80s...its not like I have A-Rod who's in the prime of his career, although iw ouldn't mind him...I shoudl pro'lly look for some guys who played mainly in the 80s or 50s or even the 20s, but... eh... lol... I'm gonna pick the best guys available, not by era...

 

[Politician Spock]

ok, since ya'll want discussion to be started...honestly what do you guys think of my team?

I wouldn't have taken a player that has such a glaring weakness (no glove whatsoever) as early as you took Frank. It's hard to judge the teams because we are still very early in this thing.

I wish I had my next 2 picks... of course I'm not even 100% sure about the guys I'm looking at...I really wanted Griffey and A-Rod... I'd have a monster team if I had gotten them two guys...2. A-Rod3. Griffey4. Thomas...I wanted THAT lineup... }=O( *sad*

I don't want Griffey in the Cincinnati Reds lineup!!! However, I can't say it was a bad pick to take him. He's hit 500 career HRs, and is held by most people to be the best defensive centerfielder for a decade. But honestly, I don't see how he would be a #3 hitter with a lineup of legends.Same argument for Thomas batting 4th.