fringe Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 Jimmy Rollins couldn`t hold a candle to Jose Reyes and keep in mind your talking to a guy who saw pretty much every Mets home game in the summer last year. doesn't that make you that much more biased? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandolphScott Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Yes, if I said differently I apologize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Yes, if I said differently I apologize. apologize? this is a message board Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 While the Mets have an incredible offense and pen, their starting pitching has the possibility to be so bad as to be bad. The Phillies on the other hand have a strong batting order and a very strong rotation to go with a top closer. They say pitching wins ballgames so I guess it's all dependant on the Mets starting pitchers. But to say that it's no contest, BS. The Phils made some good moves this offseason. Do not forget pitching wins with a good defense behind it, the Phils with Helms and Howard at the corner are putrid, Utley is average at best. Rollins is the only decent fielder in that infield. Remember the Met teams of the late 80's early 90's? Gooden, Viola, Cone, Darling, Fernandez, Ojeda, 6 above average starters, yet the team could not win. WHy? Because the defense behind them was utter trash, the Phils defense is not good, factor in that they play in a hitters park and it even lessens their percieved starting pitching strengths. EVer seen Burrel play LF? He makes Roger Cedeno look like Jim Edmonds. You are right, pitching does win, entire pitching wins and the Mets are a team built around their bullpen. I cannot stress enough at the Mets with Perez and Maine at #3 and #4 in 07 to start are an improvement over Tracshel and Zambrano in those same spots in 06. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 defense is overrated. sf giants have been stressing defense for years, look where it gets them. you get some gold gloves to put on the empty mantle. if you have pitchers who keep the defense in the game by hitting their spots and not throwing 10 pitches to each batter, an adequate defense (who are good hitters) will win games. a pitcher who pitches to location makes an average defense look great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teufelhunde Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 I don`t agree with this at all, I do agree with the rest of it. Jose Reyes is the most dynamic player in the Major Leagues today. Has the ability to hit over 20 homers and had 81 RBIs for a lead off hitter in the National League. Jimmy Rollins couldn`t hold a candle to Jose Reyes Rollins had more homers and more ribbies...as a leadoff hitter. Do not forget pitching wins with a good defense behind it, the Phils with Helms and Howard at the corner are putrid, Utley is average at best. Rollins is the only decent fielder in that infield. Remember the Met teams of the late 80's early 90's? Gooden, Viola, Cone, Darling, Fernandez, Ojeda, 6 above average starters, yet the team could not win. WHy? Because the defense behind them was utter trash, the Phils defense is not good, factor in that they play in a hitters park and it even lessens their percieved starting pitching strengths. EVer seen Burrel play LF? He makes Roger Cedeno look like Jim Edmonds. Utley has improved dramatically in the field over the past season and a half, he's making some nice plays out there. I don't really know about Helms, but Howard really isn't all that bad. He's not gonna make too many highlite reel shows with his glove, but he doesn't make mistakes out there either. That's all you really need from your first baseman. As for Burrell, he's a suprisingly good fielder...when he's healthy. The past two seasons he's had nagging leg and knee injuries that have slowed him down. He's not fast, but he seems to make great reads on the ball when its hit. He doesn't need to cover all that much ground anymore anyway. Rowand can cheat over to left a bit because Shane Victorino can cover a ridiculous amount of field he's so damn fast. The Phillies defense isn't bad at all, I don't know where you're getting that from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Rollins had more homers and more ribbies...as a leadoff hitter. Utley has improved dramatically in the field over the past season and a half, he's making some nice plays out there. I don't really know about Helms, but Howard really isn't all that bad. He's not gonna make too many highlite reel shows with his glove, but he doesn't make mistakes out there either. That's all you really need from your first baseman. As for Burrell, he's a suprisingly good fielder...when he's healthy. The past two seasons he's had nagging leg and knee injuries that have slowed him down. He's not fast, but he seems to make great reads on the ball when its hit. He doesn't need to cover all that much ground anymore anyway. Rowand can cheat over to left a bit because Shane Victorino can cover a ridiculous amount of field he's so damn fast. The Phillies defense isn't bad at all, I don't know where you're getting that from. Carlos Delgado is a bad 1Bmen and Ryan Howard makes him look like Keith Hernandez. I saw him make PLENTY of mistakes and his fielding% and error totals prove that point. 1B defense is very underrated, especially with a 2Bmen with limited range. Howards best position is DH. Utley is improving, but still average at best. Helms? His best position is 1B. Why did I not mention Victorino and Rowand, because I was talking about bad defense and no point in mentioning the 2 best defenders on the team when stressing the below average defense the Phils posses. I am sorry we can disagree on Burrell, his arm is not geat, I have seen him misjudge plenty of balls over the years and IMO his best position is 1B or DH, positions he both played before becoming a pro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virginia Giant Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Do not forget pitching wins with a good defense behind it, the Phils with Helms and Howard at the corner are putrid, Utley is average at best. Rollins is the only decent fielder in that infield. Remember the Met teams of the late 80's early 90's? Gooden, Viola, Cone, Darling, Fernandez, Ojeda, 6 above average starters, yet the team could not win. WHy? Because the defense behind them was utter trash, the Phils defense is not good, factor in that they play in a hitters park and it even lessens their percieved starting pitching strengths. EVer seen Burrel play LF? He makes Roger Cedeno look like Jim Edmonds. You are right, pitching does win, entire pitching wins and the Mets are a team built around their bullpen. I cannot stress enough at the Mets with Perez and Maine at #3 and #4 in 07 to start are an improvement over Tracshel and Zambrano in those same spots in 06. So basically, by that assesment, we can say the Rangers are the leading candidates to win the american league? They had the 4th ranked pen (I think) in the AL last year and have added Gange who everyone says looks 100 %, have a very, good defense (especially infield) and have a so so rotation. We'll see ya in october. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 So basically, by that assesment, we can say the Rangers are the leading candidates to win the american league? They had the 4th ranked pen (I think) in the AL last year and have added Gange who everyone says looks 100 %, have a very, good defense (especially infield) and have a so so rotation. We'll see ya in october. We cannot say that, but as you do EVERY year you can, so yes the Rangers are the leading candidates to win the AL. BTW I do not think I once said good defense and a solid bullpen makes you a leading candidate to win, its just that without either you are a likely to fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 So basically, by that assesment, we can say the Rangers are the leading candidates to win the american league? They had the 4th ranked pen (I think) in the AL last year and have added Gange who everyone says looks 100 %, have a very, good defense (especially infield) and have a so so rotation. We'll see ya in october. fitting you said gange (which sounds like ganja) instead of gagne. because if you think he's going to be back to his old form, you're smoking 'ganja' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teufelhunde Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Carlos Delgado is a bad 1Bmen and Ryan Howard makes him look like Keith Hernandez. I saw him make PLENTY of mistakes and his fielding% and error totals prove that point. 1B defense is very underrated, especially with a 2Bmen with limited range. Howards best position is DH. A .991 FP and a dozen errors makes him horrible? Like I said, he won't be winning any gold gloves anytime soon, but he's not the bumbling stumbling retard out there you're making him out to be. I am sorry we can disagree on Burrell, his arm is not geat, I have seen him misjudge plenty of balls over the years and IMO his best position is 1B or DH, positions he both played before becoming a pro. Are we even talking about the same player here? Burrell has an absolute cannon for an arm. He's a solid fielder, that's about it. But he doesn't need to be great with Rowand and Victorino out there. Again, he's not the disaster you're trying to make him look like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gateb Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Rollins had more homers and more ribbies...as a leadoff hitter. So? Reyes was more dynamic, more clutch, more consistent then Rollins. RBIs and HRs do NOT determine the leadoff hitter's ability. You know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
420 Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Fuck Rollins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 A .991 FP and a dozen errors makes him horrible? Like I said, he won't be winning any gold gloves anytime soon, but he's not the bumbling stumbling retard out there you're making him out to be. Are we even talking about the same player here? Burrell has an absolute cannon for an arm. He's a solid fielder, that's about it. But he doesn't need to be great with Rowand and Victorino out there. Again, he's not the disaster you're trying to make him look like. 991 for a 1b is BELOW average, well below. Like I said, we can disagree on Burrell, I have seen him absolutely butcher plays in LF. There was a reason in college he DH's and played 1B. Ask most scouts and baseball analysts they will tell you that Burrell is below average. One thing I will concede is that with a great CF like Rowand combined with aRF like Victorino that can cover ground it allows Burrell to cheat the line more, which helps tremedously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 So? Reyes was more dynamic, more clutch, more consistent then Rollins. RBIs and HRs do NOT determine the leadoff hitter's ability. You know that. Rollins also played 81 games in an absolute bandbox. See Reyes career numbers there? SOmething tells m 25 homers would be easily attainable for him there. I could care less about homers for Reyes, its about runs produced and the man produced 200 runs with 81 rbis and over 120 rtuns scored. Thats what I want in a leadoff hitter. BTW Rollins is pretty good, but the question you simply have to ask is who would you rather have? Neither are bad, but at his age and continuing improvement I will take Reyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virginia Giant Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 We cannot say that, but as you do EVERY year you can, so yes the Rangers are the leading candidates to win the AL. BTW I do not think I once said good defense and a solid bullpen makes you a leading candidate to win, its just that without either you are a likely to fail. Oh yes, I forgot Mets fans have not been predicting the playoffs for 5 years or so, and predicting WS championships for at least 2. OK, so my question is where do the Rangers and Mets differ so much? Bullpens? both good Rotation, both have promising members, but big questions Defense, both good Offense, both good Depth, honestly i don't know alot about the depths of the Mets, but the Rangers appear to have alot of outfield depth, even though losing Derosa hurt us. The 1 difference is the Manager, and we'll see what Washington brings us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virginia Giant Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 fitting you said gange (which sounds like ganja) instead of gagne. because if you think he's going to be back to his old form, you're smoking 'ganja' The great thing is, if he bombs, we still have Aki, who was somewhere like 32 of 36 last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Jeans Posted February 9, 2007 Author Share Posted February 9, 2007 Oh yes, I forgot Mets fans have not been predicting the playoffs for 5 years or so, and predicting WS championships for at least 2. OK, so my question is where do the Rangers and Mets differ so much? Bullpens? both good Rotation, both have promising members, but big questions Defense, both good Offense, both good Depth, honestly i don't know alot about the depths of the Mets, but the Rangers appear to have alot of outfield depth, even though losing Derosa hurt us. The 1 difference is the Manager, and we'll see what Washington brings us. Who is the Rangers catcher and RF'er this year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxi-xxv Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 Oh yes, I forgot Mets fans have not been predicting the playoffs for 5 years or so, and predicting WS championships for at least 2. OK, so my question is where do the Rangers and Mets differ so much? Bullpens? both good Rotation, both have promising members, but big questions Defense, both good Offense, both good Depth, honestly i don't know alot about the depths of the Mets, but the Rangers appear to have alot of outfield depth, even though losing Derosa hurt us. The 1 difference is the Manager, and we'll see what Washington brings us. I do not know what Met fans you are speaking of, but I myself hd been so down on this organization since the end of 2000 through the hiring of Art Howe I was sickened by actualy watching them. My disdain flt they would finish 3rd in 06 as I wondered ifBeltran was another Bobby Bonilla? I do not know why EVERY single baseball thread IN EVERY category fr EVERY team turns into a Ranger debate with you, but I guess I can say the difference in the two teams is that one won 97 games, lost game 7 of the LCS to the eventual World Champions and the other did not. I do not know what you want people to logically say? The Rangers are better than the Mets? Yeah fine whatever, guess they are. I will hang my hat on defending a division title and winning the most games in the National League. One thing I do think the Mets and Rangers have in common are tremendous coaching specialists in Jaramillo and Peterson. Its no conicidence despite that marginal talent seem to always have their best years offensively under Jaramillo(Zeile, Matthews Jr., Dean Palmer etc), same goes with Peterson who has always been able to get a lot out of his pitching staffs in Oakland and now NY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LorfTVP Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 I do not know what Met fans you are speaking of, but I myself hd been so down on this organization since the end of 2000 through the hiring of Art Howe I was sickened by actualy watching them. My disdain flt they would finish 3rd in 06 as I wondered ifBeltran was another Bobby Bonilla? I do not know why EVERY single baseball thread IN EVERY category fr EVERY team turns into a Ranger debate with you, but I guess I can say the difference in the two teams is that one won 97 games, lost game 7 of the LCS to the eventual World Champions and the other did not. I do not know what you want people to logically say? The Rangers are better than the Mets? Yeah fine whatever, guess they are. I will hang my hat on defending a division title and winning the most games in the National League. One thing I do think the Mets and Rangers have in common are tremendous coaching specialists in Jaramillo and Peterson. Its no conicidence despite that marginal talent seem to always have their best years offensively under Jaramillo(Zeile, Matthews Jr., Dean Palmer etc), same goes with Peterson who has always been able to get a lot out of his pitching staffs in Oakland and now NY. A lot of people don't realize how much shit the Mets had to go through to get that far...with injuries all around, a sub-par injured Pedro season, and having to depend on Victor Zambrano. Their offense will take them places. As for Mets vs. Rangers, that's a tough one, though I'd lean towards Mets because of money and the ability to make midseason trades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virginia Giant Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 Who is the Rangers catcher and RF'er this year? C- Gerald Laird, started a couple years ago but wasn't ready, mainly at calling games, split time almost 50-50 last season. highly regarded enough that they let Barajas walk. RF - Nelson Cruz, very highly thought of by everybody. Every site I've read about him on when we traded for him says he's a 5 tool player, and he's been tearing up the dominican league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virginia Giant Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 I do not know what Met fans you are speaking of, but I myself hd been so down on this organization since the end of 2000 through the hiring of Art Howe I was sickened by actualy watching them. My disdain flt they would finish 3rd in 06 as I wondered ifBeltran was another Bobby Bonilla? I do not know why EVERY single baseball thread IN EVERY category fr EVERY team turns into a Ranger debate with you, but I guess I can say the difference in the two teams is that one won 97 games, lost game 7 of the LCS to the eventual World Champions and the other did not. I do not know what you want people to logically say? The Rangers are better than the Mets? Yeah fine whatever, guess they are. I will hang my hat on defending a division title and winning the most games in the National League. One thing I do think the Mets and Rangers have in common are tremendous coaching specialists in Jaramillo and Peterson. Its no conicidence despite that marginal talent seem to always have their best years offensively under Jaramillo(Zeile, Matthews Jr., Dean Palmer etc), same goes with Peterson who has always been able to get a lot out of his pitching staffs in Oakland and now NY. Are you fucking kidding me? I made the first Rangers post as a joke, excuse the fuck outta me. I'm sorry you feel the need to take EVERY post on this board to heart and get offended by ANY fycking body MAYBE saying the METS MIGHTa have some fucking competition on their hands this year. I'm sorry that i compared the team i know the most about the the invinsible Mets, in fact, shame on me. ythe Rangers may win 30 games while the mets win 162, I'll go hang myself immediately for the injustice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 yea VG, butt out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virginia Giant Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 yea VG, butt out Shhhh, don't mention the Giants anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so-cal dub Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 Oh yes, I forgot Mets fans have not been predicting the playoffs for 5 years or so, and predicting WS championships for at least 2. OK, so my question is where do the Rangers and Mets differ so much? Bullpens? both good Rotation, both have promising members, but big questions Defense, both good Offense, both good Depth, honestly i don't know alot about the depths of the Mets, but the Rangers appear to have alot of outfield depth, even though losing Derosa hurt us. The 1 difference is the Manager, and we'll see what Washington brings us. You forgot another factor. Stadium, Arlington=Nay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now