Joe Mauer: AL MVP

[SenseCommon]

i love how the voters choose the wrong players for gold gloves, but somehow they apparently always make the right choices for mvp...right nocommonsense?

Stole...that's ******* rich, dude. You're the idiot who used uzr and got nutted in the face by your own stupid logic. I didn't even have to do anything, you dug that hole yourself.

I'll go ******* toe to toe with you on baseball any ******* day of the week, son. Go finish your cotton candy, sweet heart.

lol

 

[SenseCommon]

I like Matt Holliday. he's young, above average fielder with an above average arm.

Yankees outfield blows ass as is.

I'd like to see an offer of 90-100 mill over 6 years (15-17 a year) you can throw in incentives with an option.

I'd like to see him batting behind A-rod giving him some protection...even though his stints in the AL are far from stellar I still like him. Just my personal opinion.

I don't see the Yanks going after Halladay, apparently Blue Jays want Jesus Montero and Hughes and/or Joba

Not worth it to me for a guy who is reaching the twilight and is going to demand 20 mill+ a year. Thats the old yankee thinking (2000-08) which got us nothing.

I'd like to see how much money Lackey wants to see thrown his way.

I think the Joba experiment needs to end. He does not have the arm strength to be a reliable starting pitcher. He had arm trouble in the minors and is still showing it. Joba was starting to get back to form towards the end games of hte playoffs coming out of the pen hitting 95-97 a few times on the gun.

I would like to see them work Hughes back into the rotation as a #4 starter preferably. He has the stuff, I don't think anyone questions that...he needs to get his head right and have Joba set it up for Mo to make it a 7/8 inning game.

Damon- Last I heard Boras is asking for Jeter type money for Damon. Not gonna happen, sorry Johnny. He wants a big pay day cause he lost millions in a ponzi scheme in texas but he isn't getting 18-20 mill a year.

I read Yankees are really interested in Aroldis Chapman which from what I read on him, he is an absolute stud.

I don't know where Halladay is going to go. I don't think the Red Sox are stupid enough to trade Bucholz and Casey kelly for 1 year of Halladay plus a long term deal of 20 mill a year plus.

Be a bad move long term

Yeah, Joba just isn't a starter. Although the closer position is the most overrated position in baseball, the Yanks should look at Joba as Rivera's eventual replacement.

I can see the Yanks making a strong play at both Lackey and Holliday. My money is on them coming away with one of them, probably Holliday.

Yeah, half of baseball is all over Chapman. He's got a scary arm!

As a Cubs fan, the player I want most it Curtis Granderson. He's a great defensive CF, solid hitter, and still in his prime! Give me Uggla and Granderson, and I'd be a very happy man.

 

[Andrew2382]

i'm gonna disagree and say the closer position isnt over rated
but vital
look at these past playoffs as the best evidence.

Every closer with the exception of Mo blew a game

Nathan
Papelbon
Fuentes
Street
Lidge

Knowing the game is over when the 9th comes around is a huge advantage

 

[Paulie]

i love how the voters choose the wrong players for gold gloves, but somehow they apparently always make the right choices for mvp...right nocommonsense?

Stole...that's ******* rich, dude. You're the idiot who used uzr and got nutted in the face by your own stupid logic. I didn't even have to do anything, you dug that hole yourself.

I'll go ******* toe to toe with you on baseball any ******* day of the week, son. Go finish your cotton candy, sweet heart.

lol

That's what the **** I thought, *****

 

[Xenophon]

I will agree that Jeter didn't probably deserve his gold glove but I will say that Tex deserved his.

The scouting report on Teixeira is that of a Gold Glove caliber first baseman, and this incongruence between the numbers and the scouts brings me to my point. I love statistics, and use them liberally when it comes to hitting. However, in regard to defense, they are best used in conjunction with scouting reports, with neither element holding greater weight. Defensive metrics are surprisingly subjective, as they often include judgments made by an official scorer. Because they are a very inexact science, treating them as definitive or significantly better than scouting reports seems a bit silly. To some degree, we have to trust our eyes to properly place Teixeira on the spectrum of defensive ability.

it’s worth noting that ZR and UZR don’t capture a 1B’s ability to scoop bad throws or to chase down foul popups, which are probably worth a few runs.

I know that Derek Jeter is bad defensively because I can easily observe his lack of range, and the numbers confirm that. On the other hand, I find it hard to believe that Brett Gardner is the second coming of Willie Mays given his poor routes to balls, and I think that the defensive metrics probably overrate him a bit. Ultimately, it is important to find some sort of balance between the scouting reports and the metrics. Otherwise, there is no way that you can form an accurate conception of a player’s defensive ability.

You believe Jeter lacks range and didn't deserve his gold glove and you call yourself a Yankees fan?

Hah, name a better SS going to his right and throwing from the hole.

You can't, because there is none.

People have been trying to say Jeter lacks range since he came up, yet he remains the best defense SS in the AL, as voted on by the guys that watch the game.

 

[Xenophon]

I like Matt Holliday. he's young, above average fielder with an above average arm.

Yankees outfield blows ass as is.

I'd like to see an offer of 90-100 mill over 6 years (15-17 a year) you can throw in incentives with an option.

I'd like to see him batting behind A-rod giving him some protection...even though his stints in the AL are far from stellar I still like him. Just my personal opinion.

I don't see the Yanks going after Halladay, apparently Blue Jays want Jesus Montero and Hughes and/or Joba

Not worth it to me for a guy who is reaching the twilight and is going to demand 20 mill+ a year. Thats the old yankee thinking (2000-08) which got us nothing.

I'd like to see how much money Lackey wants to see thrown his way.

I think the Joba experiment needs to end. He does not have the arm strength to be a reliable starting pitcher. He had arm trouble in the minors and is still showing it. Joba was starting to get back to form towards the end games of hte playoffs coming out of the pen hitting 95-97 a few times on the gun.

I would like to see them work Hughes back into the rotation as a #4 starter preferably. He has the stuff, I don't think anyone questions that...he needs to get his head right and have Joba set it up for Mo to make it a 7/8 inning game.

Damon- Last I heard Boras is asking for Jeter type money for Damon. Not gonna happen, sorry Johnny. He wants a big pay day cause he lost millions in a ponzi scheme in texas but he isn't getting 18-20 mill a year.

I read Yankees are really interested in Aroldis Chapman which from what I read on him, he is an absolute stud.

I don't know where Halladay is going to go. I don't think the Red Sox are stupid enough to trade Bucholz and Casey kelly for 1 year of Halladay plus a long term deal of 20 mill a year plus.

Be a bad move long term

NY isn't going after Holiday or Haliday.

Cashman wants to bring up the kid CF this year, and he's keeping a spot open for Crawford.

Lacky makes a lot of sense for the Yankees, get him and you can keep Jaba where he belongs in the pen, and maybe work Hughes in as the #4 or 5 depending on whether pettit re ups.

Damon will be lucky if he's offered 5 mil by anybody with his rotten glove, look at what happened to Abreau last year, a better hitter and nobody wanted him.

The Red Sox seem to want to dump Burkett so they see Haliday as their new Curt Schilling so I think they will over do it with players.

 

[Xenophon]

i'm gonna disagree and say the closer position isnt over rated
but vital
look at these past playoffs as the best evidence.

Every closer with the exception of Mo blew a game

Nathan
Papelbon
Fuentes
Street
Lidge

Knowing the game is over when the 9th comes around is a huge advantage

Since the 70s the closer spot has ben vital to a championship, lack of one cost Atlanta so many possible championships, think of it, 3 HoF starters and they only won the big one once in 14 tries.

 

[Andrew2382]

I will agree that Jeter didn't probably deserve his gold glove but I will say that Tex deserved his.

The scouting report on Teixeira is that of a Gold Glove caliber first baseman, and this incongruence between the numbers and the scouts brings me to my point. I love statistics, and use them liberally when it comes to hitting. However, in regard to defense, they are best used in conjunction with scouting reports, with neither element holding greater weight. Defensive metrics are surprisingly subjective, as they often include judgments made by an official scorer. Because they are a very inexact science, treating them as definitive or significantly better than scouting reports seems a bit silly. To some degree, we have to trust our eyes to properly place Teixeira on the spectrum of defensive ability.

it’s worth noting that ZR and UZR don’t capture a 1B’s ability to scoop bad throws or to chase down foul popups, which are probably worth a few runs.

I know that Derek Jeter is bad defensively because I can easily observe his lack of range, and the numbers confirm that. On the other hand, I find it hard to believe that Brett Gardner is the second coming of Willie Mays given his poor routes to balls, and I think that the defensive metrics probably overrate him a bit. Ultimately, it is important to find some sort of balance between the scouting reports and the metrics. Otherwise, there is no way that you can form an accurate conception of a player’s defensive ability.

You believe Jeter lacks range and didn't deserve his gold glove and you call yourself a Yankees fan?

Hah, name a better SS going to his right and throwing from the hole.

You can't, because there is none.

People have been trying to say Jeter lacks range since he came up, yet he remains the best defense SS in the AL, as voted on by the guys that watch the game.

Xeno, you don't know what you are talking about bro.

Yes I am a Yankee fan and quite frankly the most knowledgable Yankee and Baseball fan you know.

Jeter's range is no longer what it used to be and even in his prime it was above average. His 8 errors are meaningless when his range isn't good...

No one is a bigger Jeter fan then me...I got over 5 grand in memorabilia by him a lone.

(1) Hardly anyone is arguing that Jeter was a lousy fielding shortstop. While he did have a number of weak years at SS, his play improved substantially this year and he would clearly rank in the top half of shortstop in 2009 in the AL based on fielding.

(2) Let's use Andrus as a comparison. Andrus got to 67 more balls (while playing five fewer games) and also had 55 more put-outs. He made 14 more errors. Putting aside the put outs,on 67 chances, Andrus got outs 53 times and had error 14 times.

(3) We don't know how many ground balls each team gave up but I do know what percentage of hit balls were ground balls. The Yankees had the 9th lowest percentage of ground balls while the Rangers had the 10 lowest -- virtually the same. So chances are Jeter has as many ground balls go through to his area as did Andrus. That means Jeter simply got to 67 fewer ground balls.

(4) Which would you rather have: Andrus getting to 53 of 67 ground balls or Jeter getting to zero of 67? Seems pretty clear, doesn't it?

(5) The UZR (ultimate zone rating) takes into account range AND errors. Andrus was clearly better when both are considered - a UZR of 10.7 v. 6.6.

(6) Ozzie Smith is widely regarded as the best defensive shortstop ever. He averaged more than 20 errors a year per 162 games during the prime of his career. He also got to more balls than anyone else.

Just because I say that other people may have deserved the gold glove doesn't mean I'm not a Yankee fan...it means I'm not a homer who thinks my team is infalliable like some Yankee fans out there

 

[SenseCommon]

I will agree that Jeter didn't probably deserve his gold glove but I will say that Tex deserved his.

The scouting report on Teixeira is that of a Gold Glove caliber first baseman, and this incongruence between the numbers and the scouts brings me to my point. I love statistics, and use them liberally when it comes to hitting. However, in regard to defense, they are best used in conjunction with scouting reports, with neither element holding greater weight. Defensive metrics are surprisingly subjective, as they often include judgments made by an official scorer. Because they are a very inexact science, treating them as definitive or significantly better than scouting reports seems a bit silly. To some degree, we have to trust our eyes to properly place Teixeira on the spectrum of defensive ability.

it’s worth noting that ZR and UZR don’t capture a 1B’s ability to scoop bad throws or to chase down foul popups, which are probably worth a few runs.

I know that Derek Jeter is bad defensively because I can easily observe his lack of range, and the numbers confirm that. On the other hand, I find it hard to believe that Brett Gardner is the second coming of Willie Mays given his poor routes to balls, and I think that the defensive metrics probably overrate him a bit. Ultimately, it is important to find some sort of balance between the scouting reports and the metrics. Otherwise, there is no way that you can form an accurate conception of a player’s defensive ability.

You believe Jeter lacks range and didn't deserve his gold glove and you call yourself a Yankees fan?

Hah, name a better SS going to his right and throwing from the hole.

You can't, because there is none.

People have been trying to say Jeter lacks range since he came up, yet he remains the best defense SS in the AL, as voted on by the guys that watch the game.

Xeno, you don't know what you are talking about bro.

Yes I am a Yankee fan and quite frankly the most knowledgable Yankee and Baseball fan you know.

Jeter's range is no longer what it used to be and even in his prime it was above average. His 8 errors are meaningless when his range isn't good...

No one is a bigger Jeter fan then me...I got over 5 grand in memorabilia by him a lone.

(1) Hardly anyone is arguing that Jeter was a lousy fielding shortstop. While he did have a number of weak years at SS, his play improved substantially this year and he would clearly rank in the top half of shortstop in 2009 in the AL based on fielding.

(2) Let's use Andrus as a comparison. Andrus got to 67 more balls (while playing five fewer games) and also had 55 more put-outs. He made 14 more errors. Putting aside the put outs,on 67 chances, Andrus got outs 53 times and had error 14 times.

(3) We don't know how many ground balls each team gave up but I do know what percentage of hit balls were ground balls. The Yankees had the 9th lowest percentage of ground balls while the Rangers had the 10 lowest -- virtually the same. So chances are Jeter has as many ground balls go through to his area as did Andrus. That means Jeter simply got to 67 fewer ground balls.

(4) Which would you rather have: Andrus getting to 53 of 67 ground balls or Jeter getting to zero of 67? Seems pretty clear, doesn't it?

(5) The UZR (ultimate zone rating) takes into account range AND errors. Andrus was clearly better when both are considered - a UZR of 10.7 v. 6.6.
(6) Ozzie Smith is widely regarded as the best defensive shortstop ever. He averaged more than 20 errors a year per 162 games during the prime of his career. He also got to more balls than anyone else.
Just because I say that other people may have deserved the gold glove doesn't mean I'm not a Yankee fan...it means I'm not a homer who thinks my team is infalliable like some Yankee fans out there

Good points! There's no hope for these guys, Andrew. They haven't caught up to the times with baseball. They are simply out of touch!

 

[SenseCommon]

i'm gonna disagree and say the closer position isnt over rated
but vital
look at these past playoffs as the best evidence.

Every closer with the exception of Mo blew a game

Nathan
Papelbon
Fuentes
Street
Lidge

Knowing the game is over when the 9th comes around is a huge advantage

Here's why the closer, and the save stat, are overrated...

Closers, ALL closers, are failed starters. Even the greatest closer of all time, Mariano, was a failed starter.

Closers, for the most part, only pitch one inning a game. That inning is pitched with a lead of more than one run a lot of the time. The closer also doesn't face the heart of the order half of the time. The setup man may face the 2-3-4 hitter of the opposing teams lineup in the 8th inning, while the closer will face the 5-6-7 hitters. Who really got the job done there?

So, the closer can have a 3 run lead, pitch one inning(the 9th), face the opposing teams 7-8-9 hitters, and get a save. The stat, and the role, are extremely overrated!

On a season, a closer has an affect over 60 or so innings. That's it. And none of those innings are when his team is trailing. He has the comfort of having a lead. Sure, sometimes a blown save costs a team, but you can't let that be the example.. Errors, lack of hitting, middle relief men, all contribute to losses, yet we don't stress those things, because there isn't a silly stat hung next to them.

What is the difference between the setup man in the 8th inning, who faces the opposing team up by one, and faces the opposing teams 2-3-4 hitters. And the closer being up by one run, facing the opposing teams weaker 5-6-7 hitters? It happens all the times. Yet it's the same situation!

Don't let the dramatics of a stat fool you. Closers are overrated, and always are failed starters. The closer position is filled by mediocre pitchers all over the league. Finally, the closers impact on a game is minimal, and usually takes place while his team has the lead!

 

[Andrew2382]

i'm gonna disagree and say the closer position isnt over rated
but vital
look at these past playoffs as the best evidence.

Every closer with the exception of Mo blew a game

Nathan
Papelbon
Fuentes
Street
Lidge

Knowing the game is over when the 9th comes around is a huge advantage

Here's why the closer, and the save stat, are overrated...

Closers, ALL closers, are failed starters. Even the greatest closer of all time, Mariano, was a failed starter.

Closers, for the most part, only pitch one inning a game. That inning is pitched with a lead of more than one run a lot of the time. The closer also doesn't face the heart of the order half of the time. The setup man may face the 2-3-4 hitter of the opposing teams lineup in the 8th inning, while the closer will face the 5-6-7 hitters. Who really got the job done there?

So, the closer can have a 3 run lead, pitch one inning(the 9th), face the opposing teams 7-8-9 hitters, and get a save. The stat, and the role, are extremely overrated!

On a season, a closer has an affect over 60 or so innings. That's it. And none of those innings are when his team is trailing. He has the comfort of having a lead. Sure, sometimes a blown save costs a team, but you can't let that be the example.. Errors, lack of hitting, middle relief men, all contribute to losses, yet we don't stress those things, because there isn't a silly stat hung next to them.

What is the difference between the setup man in the 8th inning, who faces the opposing team up by one, and faces the opposing teams 2-3-4 hitters. And the closer being up by one run, facing the opposing teams weaker 5-6-7 hitters? It happens all the times. Yet it's the same situation!

Don't let the dramatics of a stat fool you. Closers are overrated, and always are failed starters. The closer position is filled by mediocre pitchers all over the league. Finally, the closers impact on a game is minimal, and usually takes place while his team has the lead!

I hear ya and it's a valid argument however the closer also sees the heart of the lineup many times.

Like I said look at this past post season and see how many games were blown because of a bad closer.

Fuentes gave up a huge home run to A-rod to tie the game in the 9th that the Yankees went on to win.

Nathan blew a game to A-rod as well that the Yanks went on to win.

Street blew a game

Lidge blew a lead to make a game go into extra innings

Papelbon blew game 3 to let the Angels go and sweep.

Mariano is the only one who not only didn't blow any games/leads but also had more appearances then all the other pitchers. Mariano recorded 6 out saves, came in the 8th inning with runners on the corners and 1 out and gave up 1 run in the whole postseason.

That in itself is amazing.

Baseball has changed from the older days....

Goose Gossage, pitched when relievers actually worked for a living and were called firemen, not closers. Back then, a team's relief ace came to the rescue when needed, regardless of the inning. They didn't need a "save situation." If the alarm bells were ringing, smoke was filling the stadium and mothers were ready to toss their babies from the upper deck, they raced to the mound. No wonder they needed bullpen carts back then -- they were in such a hurry to douse the flames, they should have had Dalmations riding with them.

In Goose's first season as a closer he recorded at least 10 outs in 17 different games, including three outings of seven innings or more. Yes, seven innings. If a manager tried using a closer for that many innings today, the reliever, his agent, the Players Association and the Teamsters would file an injunction before his 20th pitch.

However, thats the way it is...the game has changed and will always continue to change.

The reason the closer is important in my opinion is because the shorter you can make the game the more vital it is.

Knowing that if you take a lead into the 8th or 9th inning with a 1-3 run lead and victory is 99.9% assured is a reassuring feeling. Example...Ask an Angels fan...every time Fuentes is on the mound no lead was big enough, they shit themselves. Ask the Met fan about Armando Benitez...Like Xeno said ask the Braves fan during their great years in the 90's. The name Jim Leyritz still strikes fear into their heart. Ask a Yankee fan if he ever has a bead of sweat with Mo on the mound. I never do, regardless if he blows the game...he is an anamoly and can do no wrong in my eyes.

Also, most closers are "failed starters" but it's also two totally different styles of pitching.

I like Beane's quote on closer's

""Having lived both sides of it, a closer doesn't seems so important until you don't have one," Beane says. "I know that sounds contradictory but a lot of emotions are tied in with the game. If there's a three-run lead in the ninth and the stats show that you win 97 percent of those games and you're upgrading to only 98 percent with your closer, well, that 1 percent increase is worth it because losing is so painful in that situation."


Closers may be overrated in the world of numbers and stats...however in today's game when you have a dominant one they are just one of those intangible pieces of success that helps a team to rings

 

[SenseCommon]

I think in todays game, a bullpen is important. But not a closer specifically.

Is the "pressure" different for the 8th inning setup man who's pitching with a one run lead, and facing the opposing teams 2-3-4 hitters, than it is for a closer pitching in the 9th, facing the opposing teams 5-6-7 hitters, with a one run league? In that scenario, which happens more often, the setup man would deserve a "save". In that case, that's where the "save" took place.

A closer comes into the game, always with a lead, facing hitters who haven't seen his "stuff" all game.

A starter faces the opposing teams lineup 3, sometimes 4 times a game. Thus, constant adjustments, and baseball strategy is always in motion.

The number 5 starter on a baseball team, is more important than the closer. The starter is responsible for more innings, has more of an impact on the game, and has to make constant adjustments.

Here are the mediocre pitchers who were closers last season....

Brad Lidge
Mike MacDougal
Jim Johnson
Chad Qualls
Bobby Jenks
Kevin Gregg
Matt Lindstrom
Leo Nunez
Brian Fuentes
Brian Wilson
Matt Capps
Fernando Rodney
David Aardsma
Ryan Franklin

I mean, look at some of these guys career numbers!

Many teams even had their best relievers stay out of the closers role on purpose, because they realize that the most important parts of a game, are in the 7th and 8th inning.....

The Cubs had Carlos Marmol as their setup man, while they left Kevin Gregg as closer..

The Braves used Mike Gonzalez is tougher spots, while they let Soriano close....

The White Sox left Matt Thorton as a setup man, while Bobby Jenks closed....

The Phillies had Ryan Madson pitch the tough spots, while Brad Lidged closed....

The Giants had Jeremy Affeldt pitch in tough spots, while Brian WIlson closed...

Most teams in baseball had setup men who were more valuable than their closers....

 

[Paulie]

The Phillies had Ryan Madson pitch the tough spots, while Brad Lidged closed....

"pitch the tough spots" ??

What the **** is THAT supposed to mean? He was simply our 8th inning set-up man when Lidge wasn't hurt and was still the closer. He filled in the closer role when Lidge was out, and also when Charlie shut Lidge down those last couple weeks at the end of the season.

Stop talking baseball. PLEASE.

 

[SenseCommon]

The Phillies had Ryan Madson pitch the tough spots, while Brad Lidged closed....

"pitch the tough spots" ??

What the **** is THAT supposed to mean? He was simply our 8th inning set-up man when Lidge wasn't hurt and was still the closer. He filled in the closer role when Lidge was out, and also when Charlie shut Lidge down those last couple weeks at the end of the season.

Stop talking baseball. PLEASE.

You're not able to understand this, are you?

My point, which you couldn't understand, was that relievers who pitch in the 7th and 8th inning, are often more valuable than closers. Hence, I stated that Ryan Madson pitched in tougher spots than Brad Lidge, spots that called for him to inherit runners, something closers rarely do, while Lidge even struggled to handle the easy saves in the 9th. As TERRIBLE as Lidge was all season, why do you think Charlie Manuel left him as the closer? Because Ryan Madson, the teams best reliever, would have been wasted as the closer. By not having Madson as closer, Charlie Could use him in tough jams with runners in scoring positions, or to face the opposing teams 3-4-5 hitters in the 8th.

Brad Lidge 09': 7.21 ERA ... 1.807 WHIP
Ryan Madson 09': 3.26 ERA ... 1.228 WHIP

The tough spots were reserved for the better, more productive pitcher!

Look Paulie, I'm sorry you are so out of touch with baseball. I really am. I suggest you read some Bill James, and look at baseball from a more intelligent point of view.

Besides, I'm getting tired of taking you to the shed!

 

[Paulie]

The Phillies had Ryan Madson pitch the tough spots, while Brad Lidged closed....

"pitch the tough spots" ??

What the **** is THAT supposed to mean? He was simply our 8th inning set-up man when Lidge wasn't hurt and was still the closer. He filled in the closer role when Lidge was out, and also when Charlie shut Lidge down those last couple weeks at the end of the season.

Stop talking baseball. PLEASE.

You're not able to understand this, are you?

My point, which you couldn't understand, was that relievers who pitch in the 7th and 8th inning, are often more valuable than closers. Hence, I stated that Ryan Madson pitched in tougher spots than Brad Lidge, spots that called for him to inherit runners, something closers rarely do, while Lidge even struggled to handle the easy saves in the 9th. As TERRIBLE as Lidge was all season, why do you think Charlie Manuel left him as the closer? Because Ryan Madson, the teams best reliever, would have been wasted as the closer. By not having Madson as closer, Charlie Could use him in tough jams with runners in scoring positions, or to face the opposing teams 3-4-5 hitters in the 8th.

Brad Lidge 09': 7.21 ERA ... 1.807 WHIP
Ryan Madson 09': 3.26 ERA ... 1.228 WHIP

The tough spots were reserved for the better, more productive pitcher!

Look Paulie, I'm sorry you are so out of touch with baseball. I really am. I suggest you read some Bill James, and look at baseball from a more intelligent point of view.

Besides, I'm getting tired of taking you to the shed!

This is bullshit.

You made a list of several closers, and mentioned other relievers in there with them.

on some of the closers, you specifically mentioned a reliever as a "set up man" and then on others you simply said "pitch the tough spots".

Madson was our ******* set-up man all season long, unless he closed for Lidge when Lidge was out hurt, or when Lidge was finally shut down for ineffectiveness. I watched AT LEAST 100 Phillies games this year and I don't think I saw the kid come out any earlier than the 8th inning in ANY ******* ONE OF THEM. That's called a SET UP MAN. PERIOD. You want to try to kick knowledge about some other team I don't spend my entire baseball season scrutinizing, be my guest. But you aren't going to get away with it with the Phillies.

You made an attempt to save yourself from your stupidity again, and it failed. AGAIN.

I don't even suggest that you READ a book. I suggest that you simply shut the **** up about a sport you're trying desperately to pretend you know jack SHIT about.

 

[SenseCommon]

"pitch the tough spots" ??

What the **** is THAT supposed to mean? He was simply our 8th inning set-up man when Lidge wasn't hurt and was still the closer. He filled in the closer role when Lidge was out, and also when Charlie shut Lidge down those last couple weeks at the end of the season.

Stop talking baseball. PLEASE.

You're not able to understand this, are you?

My point, which you couldn't understand, was that relievers who pitch in the 7th and 8th inning, are often more valuable than closers. Hence, I stated that Ryan Madson pitched in tougher spots than Brad Lidge, spots that called for him to inherit runners, something closers rarely do, while Lidge even struggled to handle the easy saves in the 9th. As TERRIBLE as Lidge was all season, why do you think Charlie Manuel left him as the closer? Because Ryan Madson, the teams best reliever, would have been wasted as the closer. By not having Madson as closer, Charlie Could use him in tough jams with runners in scoring positions, or to face the opposing teams 3-4-5 hitters in the 8th.

Brad Lidge 09': 7.21 ERA ... 1.807 WHIP
Ryan Madson 09': 3.26 ERA ... 1.228 WHIP

The tough spots were reserved for the better, more productive pitcher!

Look Paulie, I'm sorry you are so out of touch with baseball. I really am. I suggest you read some Bill James, and look at baseball from a more intelligent point of view.

Besides, I'm getting tired of taking you to the shed!

This is bullshit.

You made a list of several closers, and mentioned other relievers in there with them.

on some of the closers, you specifically mentioned a reliever as a "set up man" and then on others you simply said "pitch the tough spots".

Madson was our ******* set-up man all season long, unless he closed for Lidge when Lidge was out hurt, or when Lidge was finally shut down for ineffectiveness. I watched AT LEAST 100 Phillies games this year and I don't think I saw the kid come out any earlier than the 8th inning in ANY ******* ONE OF THEM. That's called a SET UP MAN. PERIOD. You want to try to kick knowledge about some other team I don't spend my entire baseball season scrutinizing, be my guest. But you aren't going to get away with it with the Phillies.

You made an attempt to save yourself from your stupidity again, and it failed. AGAIN.

I don't even suggest that you READ a book. I suggest that you simply shut the **** up about a sport you're trying desperately to pretend you know jack SHIT about.

Are you really this retarded? You really can't follow my very simple point?

I'm actually sitting here feeling embarrassed for you. I'm watching a man struggle to come to terms with the fact, that he doesn't know the game of baseball. It's sad, really!

 

[Paulie]

Dude, when you say "pitch the tough spots" for some, and then say "set up man" for others, the English language dictates that as something called a DISTINCTION. Or for a layman like yourself, a DISTINGUISHABLE DIFFERENCE.

You can try and back peddle all you want. You made a moronic statement and were taken to task for it.

The fact remains that Madson was our set up man in '09. He established himself in that role most specifically because of how well he did there down the stretch in '08, and his postseason performance thereafter. If you want to talk about '08, then yes, he played a different role where he "pitched the tough spots". In '08 there was no clearly defined set up man for us.

Wipe your tears and ******* move on, dummy.

 

[SenseCommon]

Dude, when you say "pitch the tough spots" for some, and then say "set up man" for others, the English language dictates that as something called a DISTINCTION. Or for a layman like yourself, a DISTINGUISHABLE DIFFERENCE.

You can try and back peddle all you want. You made a moronic statement and were taken to task for it.

The fact remains that Madson was our set up man in '09. He established himself in that role most specifically because of how well he did there down the stretch in '08, and his postseason performance thereafter. If you want to talk about '08, then yes, he played a different role where he "pitched the tough spots". In '08 there was no clearly defined set up man for us.

Wipe your tears and ******* move on, dummy.

LOL, so you really didn't understand. Wow!

The point dumb-ass, is that setup men pitch in more "tough spots" than closers, most of the time. It was very simple. You are so out of touch, that you think the only tough spots pitched by relievers, are by the closer. That how retarded you are, LOL.

You are officially the most desperate retard on this board.

Let's keep going round-in-round, making you look stupid is getting fun!

 

[Paulie]

Dude, when you say "pitch the tough spots" for some, and then say "set up man" for others, the English language dictates that as something called a DISTINCTION. Or for a layman like yourself, a DISTINGUISHABLE DIFFERENCE.

You can try and back peddle all you want. You made a moronic statement and were taken to task for it.

The fact remains that Madson was our set up man in '09. He established himself in that role most specifically because of how well he did there down the stretch in '08, and his postseason performance thereafter. If you want to talk about '08, then yes, he played a different role where he "pitched the tough spots". In '08 there was no clearly defined set up man for us.

Wipe your tears and ******* move on, dummy.

LOL, so you really didn't understand. Wow!

The point dumb-ass, is that setup men pitch in more "tough spots" than closers, most of the time. It was very simple. You are so out of touch, that you think the only tough spots pitched by relievers, are by the closer. That how retarded you are, LOL.

You are officially the most desperate retard on this board.

Let's keep going round-in-round, making you look stupid is getting fun!

A set-up man starts the 8th inning off. A closer starts the 9th inning off. Either way, the pitcher is opening the inning with no runners on base. How 'tough' the spot is in either inning depends on who's due up. But being responsible for getting the last 3 outs of the game with a 2 or 1 run lead is typically a much tougher spot than opening the 8th. I'm not sure there's a baseball fan alive that would disagree with that, other than YOU apparently. In fact, Madson himself said this during a postgame on-field interview after closing a game out this season.

You're trying to back peddle out of your stupid ass post about "tough spots'. Just admit that you have no clue what the **** you're talking about.

You're obviously getting a set up man EXTREMELY confused with a specialist who more often than not comes into a game with inherited runners.

Everyone knows you're a moron but you. But that's understandable, being that you're a MORON.

 

[SenseCommon]

Dude, when you say "pitch the tough spots" for some, and then say "set up man" for others, the English language dictates that as something called a DISTINCTION. Or for a layman like yourself, a DISTINGUISHABLE DIFFERENCE.

You can try and back peddle all you want. You made a moronic statement and were taken to task for it.

The fact remains that Madson was our set up man in '09. He established himself in that role most specifically because of how well he did there down the stretch in '08, and his postseason performance thereafter. If you want to talk about '08, then yes, he played a different role where he "pitched the tough spots". In '08 there was no clearly defined set up man for us.

Wipe your tears and ******* move on, dummy.

LOL, so you really didn't understand. Wow!

The point dumb-ass, is that setup men pitch in more "tough spots" than closers, most of the time. It was very simple. You are so out of touch, that you think the only tough spots pitched by relievers, are by the closer. That how retarded you are, LOL.

You are officially the most desperate retard on this board.

Let's keep going round-in-round, making you look stupid is getting fun!

A set-up man starts the 8th inning off. A closer starts the 9th inning off. Either way, the pitcher is opening the inning with no runners on base. How 'tough' the spot is in either inning depends on who's due up. But being responsible for getting the last 3 outs of the game with a 2 or 1 run lead is typically a much tougher spot than opening the 8th. I'm not sure there's a baseball fan alive that would disagree with that, other than YOU apparently. In fact, Madson himself said this during a postgame on-field interview after closing a game out this season.

You're trying to back peddle out of your stupid ass post about "tough spots'. Just admit that you have no clue what the **** you're talking about.

You're obviously getting a set up man EXTREMELY confused with a specialist who more often than not comes into a game with inherited runners.

Everyone knows you're a moron but you. But that's understandable, being that you're a MORON.

No genius, setup men inherit runners all the time. All the time. Closers very rarely do.

Look, I'm beyond feeling bad for you and your simplistic, childish views of baseball. You haven't evolved with the game. Your views are of an older guy who hasn't caught up, and is desperately trying to hold on.

I feel bad for you. It's not easy dealing with the fact that you are terrible at something, in which you thought you were good at. Denial is a powerful thing, and you are great at it!

Discussing baseball with you is like discussing philosophy with a caveman. You are baseball retarded. I no longer get joy out of beating the shit of you in debates. I seriously feel terrible for you. So, I'm gonna lay off. Because desperation is one of the saddest things in life. I wish you well, and hope logic creeps into your life someday.

PS: You are seriously one of the dumbest ***** I've ever encountered!