05-22-2009, 07:05 PM
<!--quoteo(post=39494:date=May 22 2009, 04:51 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ May 22 2009, 04:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=39488:date=May 22 2009, 05:12 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ May 22 2009, 05:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=39482:date=May 22 2009, 03:08 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ May 22 2009, 03:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Small sample size, I know. But this year, Freel's OPS+ is.................five.
(5)
3 singles for 2009
Will he "turn it around" at age 33? How does this man have a job? How does he have a career? He's basically a much worse Aaron Miles, yet he's made nearly $8 million dollars in his career.
(I don't know that much about him, but I assume that he must be an Ozzie Smith-caliber fielder, correct? That would be the only plausible explanation for his continued employment.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Freel's been one of the best utility men in baseball for years. He can play a bunch of positions adequately, he plays harder than anybody on the team, has some very good speed, and is a .270+ hitter when he's right. He's useful. You need to throw away OPS+ for some players in baseball, that's not a fair way to measure a player like Freel.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. "He plays hard."
Completely irrelevant. If we're basing playing time on style points, let's bring Will Clark and his gorgeous swing out of retirement.
2. "OPS+ is a bad way to judge how a player hits."
(obviously I'm not quoting you exactly) Do you have a better way? I'm all for hearing it. Batting average has not been a serious way to judge offensive contribution since the '90's.
3. "He's been one of the best utility guys for years."
Totally, completely irrelevant. Pedro Martinez was a #1 ace for years. The question is, How
can they help the 2009 Cubs?
If we just wanted a guy who could "play a bunch of positions adequately," and not hit, Cedeno can do that. Aaron Miles.
Fuck these lousy "utility" guys who can't hit their way out of a paper bag. What is Jim's fetish for this shit?!
Anyway, I applaud your spirit Clappie, but I disagree with you on this one.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. Completely irrelevant? He's like Reed. He brings an energy to the ballpark. Remember the play Reed made at Washington last year? Those are the plays Freel's always been known for and made an acrobatic play like that last night.
2. Players bring other things to the table other than hitting home runs and walking. He's our fastest baserunner now and can play third base, second base, and all outfield spots. People keep bitching about us not having DeRosa now because of his ability to play those positions, well Freel's a guy that can do it.
3. How can he help the team? Are you serious? Read the last one. I'm gonna take it you haven't watched Freel play much. Most any Reds fan will tell you he's a guy that you want on your team.
He's going to be a #8 hitter for us in the couple starts he gets a week, a very good outfielder, he can play 3rd and 2nd, and replaces Gathright as our primary pinch runner. At worst, he's Gathright with the ability to play all over the field. I seriously don't understand how you can complain about having Ryan Freel as a 25th man.
(5)
3 singles for 2009
Will he "turn it around" at age 33? How does this man have a job? How does he have a career? He's basically a much worse Aaron Miles, yet he's made nearly $8 million dollars in his career.
(I don't know that much about him, but I assume that he must be an Ozzie Smith-caliber fielder, correct? That would be the only plausible explanation for his continued employment.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Freel's been one of the best utility men in baseball for years. He can play a bunch of positions adequately, he plays harder than anybody on the team, has some very good speed, and is a .270+ hitter when he's right. He's useful. You need to throw away OPS+ for some players in baseball, that's not a fair way to measure a player like Freel.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. "He plays hard."
Completely irrelevant. If we're basing playing time on style points, let's bring Will Clark and his gorgeous swing out of retirement.
2. "OPS+ is a bad way to judge how a player hits."
(obviously I'm not quoting you exactly) Do you have a better way? I'm all for hearing it. Batting average has not been a serious way to judge offensive contribution since the '90's.
3. "He's been one of the best utility guys for years."
Totally, completely irrelevant. Pedro Martinez was a #1 ace for years. The question is, How
can they help the 2009 Cubs?
If we just wanted a guy who could "play a bunch of positions adequately," and not hit, Cedeno can do that. Aaron Miles.
Fuck these lousy "utility" guys who can't hit their way out of a paper bag. What is Jim's fetish for this shit?!
Anyway, I applaud your spirit Clappie, but I disagree with you on this one.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. Completely irrelevant? He's like Reed. He brings an energy to the ballpark. Remember the play Reed made at Washington last year? Those are the plays Freel's always been known for and made an acrobatic play like that last night.
2. Players bring other things to the table other than hitting home runs and walking. He's our fastest baserunner now and can play third base, second base, and all outfield spots. People keep bitching about us not having DeRosa now because of his ability to play those positions, well Freel's a guy that can do it.
3. How can he help the team? Are you serious? Read the last one. I'm gonna take it you haven't watched Freel play much. Most any Reds fan will tell you he's a guy that you want on your team.
He's going to be a #8 hitter for us in the couple starts he gets a week, a very good outfielder, he can play 3rd and 2nd, and replaces Gathright as our primary pinch runner. At worst, he's Gathright with the ability to play all over the field. I seriously don't understand how you can complain about having Ryan Freel as a 25th man.
@TheBlogfines