Comments on: We’re #2! We’re #2! http://umpbump.com/press/2007/10/03/were-2-were-2/ In-your-face baseball commentary Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:44:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Sarah Green http://umpbump.com/press/2007/10/03/were-2-were-2/comment-page-1/#comment-53257 Sarah Green Fri, 05 Oct 2007 21:00:51 +0000 http://umpbump.com/press/were-2-were-2/#comment-53257 Just more grist for Red Sox Nation's endlessly grinding insecurity mill! :) Just more grist for Red Sox Nation’s endlessly grinding insecurity mill! :)

Report this comment

]]> By: Pete http://umpbump.com/press/2007/10/03/were-2-were-2/comment-page-1/#comment-53256 Pete Fri, 05 Oct 2007 20:47:11 +0000 http://umpbump.com/press/were-2-were-2/#comment-53256 >> but there’s no doubt that Yankees have been unlikable for longer, giving them the edge in that dubious contest. :) >> 'Unlikable' for winning 26 championships is understandable, but becoming 'equally unlikable' for winning but *one* in the same amount of time? Now that's an accomplishment! ;) >> but there’s no doubt that Yankees have been unlikable for longer, giving them the edge in that dubious contest. :) >>

‘Unlikable’ for winning 26 championships is understandable, but becoming ‘equally unlikable’ for winning but *one* in the same amount of time?

Now that’s an accomplishment! ;)

Report this comment

]]> By: Sarah Green http://umpbump.com/press/2007/10/03/were-2-were-2/comment-page-1/#comment-53255 Sarah Green Fri, 05 Oct 2007 17:05:34 +0000 http://umpbump.com/press/were-2-were-2/#comment-53255 Paul, both teams may be "equally unlikable" in the current context (or are you referring to their fans?) but there's no doubt that Yankees have been unlikable for longer, giving them the edge in that dubious contest. :) Paul, both teams may be “equally unlikable” in the current context (or are you referring to their fans?) but there’s no doubt that Yankees have been unlikable for longer, giving them the edge in that dubious contest. :)

Report this comment

]]> By: Paul Moro http://umpbump.com/press/2007/10/03/were-2-were-2/comment-page-1/#comment-53254 Paul Moro Fri, 05 Oct 2007 14:48:14 +0000 http://umpbump.com/press/were-2-were-2/#comment-53254 Come on, Sarah. Come on now, Pete. BOTH your teams are equally unlikable. But Pete, to be fair, there are 162 games in a season. Not 19. There were 143 games you missed. And when you take all 162 games into account, Delmon Young was the worst starting RFer offensively in MLB. There were 21 RFers who came to bat at least 500 times this season. Young finished dead last in OBP (which means he was most likely to make an out out of the 21) and also dead last in Slugging % - and this includes KCs Mark Teahen who somehow hit 7 HRs this year still stayed in the lineup as a RFer. And I'm assuming that most of the time that you saw Young play this year was the 18 games TB played the Yankees. During those 18 games, Young hit .299 but had no homeruns and 7 RBIs. It's nothing special. And in the 15 games that Pedroia played against the Yanks, he had a better batting average, better OBP, and better slugging with the same number of HRs (0) and RBIs (7). So it's not like Young actually played better in those times you saw him. Trust me when I say this - the last thing I want to do is further inflate the ego of Red Sox fans. But as for this year, Pedroia was a better player. I do think that when it's all said and done that Delmon has a good shot to have the better career. Come on, Sarah. Come on now, Pete.

BOTH your teams are equally unlikable.

But Pete, to be fair, there are 162 games in a season. Not 19. There were 143 games you missed. And when you take all 162 games into account, Delmon Young was the worst starting RFer offensively in MLB. There were 21 RFers who came to bat at least 500 times this season. Young finished dead last in OBP (which means he was most likely to make an out out of the 21) and also dead last in Slugging % – and this includes KCs Mark Teahen who somehow hit 7 HRs this year still stayed in the lineup as a RFer.

And I’m assuming that most of the time that you saw Young play this year was the 18 games TB played the Yankees. During those 18 games, Young hit .299 but had no homeruns and 7 RBIs. It’s nothing special. And in the 15 games that Pedroia played against the Yanks, he had a better batting average, better OBP, and better slugging with the same number of HRs (0) and RBIs (7). So it’s not like Young actually played better in those times you saw him.

Trust me when I say this – the last thing I want to do is further inflate the ego of Red Sox fans. But as for this year, Pedroia was a better player. I do think that when it’s all said and done that Delmon has a good shot to have the better career.

Report this comment

]]> By: Pete http://umpbump.com/press/2007/10/03/were-2-were-2/comment-page-1/#comment-53253 Pete Fri, 05 Oct 2007 13:58:44 +0000 http://umpbump.com/press/were-2-were-2/#comment-53253 >> But Pete, why do you like him? >> I never said I 'liked' him. I don't much care for ANY player that doesn't play for my team. All I said was that IMO he deserved the award more than Pedroia, and that's from seeing both guys play over the course of about 19 games a piece. >> But Pete, why do you like him? >>

I never said I ‘liked’ him. I don’t much care for ANY player that doesn’t play for my team. All I said was that IMO he deserved the award more than Pedroia, and that’s from seeing both guys play over the course of about 19 games a piece.

Report this comment

]]> By: Sarah Green http://umpbump.com/press/2007/10/03/were-2-were-2/comment-page-1/#comment-53243 Sarah Green Thu, 04 Oct 2007 21:47:07 +0000 http://umpbump.com/press/were-2-were-2/#comment-53243 But Pete, why do you <em>like </em>him? I mentioned the A-Rod/Pedroia thing in my rookies post. All these different comments threads are getting very intermingled and confusing! But Pete, why do you like him?

I mentioned the A-Rod/Pedroia thing in my rookies post. All these different comments threads are getting very intermingled and confusing!

Report this comment

]]> By: Pete http://umpbump.com/press/2007/10/03/were-2-were-2/comment-page-1/#comment-53252 Pete Thu, 04 Oct 2007 21:08:50 +0000 http://umpbump.com/press/were-2-were-2/#comment-53252 >> Let’s not even talk about his whiny-little-bitch moments. >> Oh, you mean like Pedroia when A-Rod knocked him on his keister during a DP? ;-) >> Let’s not even talk about his whiny-little-bitch moments. >>

Oh, you mean like Pedroia when A-Rod knocked him on his keister during a DP? ;-)

Report this comment

]]> By: Sarah Green http://umpbump.com/press/2007/10/03/were-2-were-2/comment-page-1/#comment-53241 Sarah Green Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:01:52 +0000 http://umpbump.com/press/were-2-were-2/#comment-53241 Ugh, another Delmon Young rooter, eh? Let's not even talk about his whiny-little-bitch moments. Even if he were a paragon of virtue I would still think the excitement over him was a tad overinflated. Yes, he has a lot of RBI---he's also hitting at a prime RBI-garnering spot in the lineup. He hits well enough (fourth in AVG of all rookies with enough at-bats to qualify, after Pedroia, Willits, and Tulowitzki). But that's it. He never walks. Not a power threat. His defense is acceptable, but it's not going to help him win any prizes. And the schmancy stats (eg, VORP) don't favor him at all. Aside from the RBI, why do you like this guy? Because he doesn't play for the Red Sox? Ugh, another Delmon Young rooter, eh? Let’s not even talk about his whiny-little-bitch moments. Even if he were a paragon of virtue I would still think the excitement over him was a tad overinflated. Yes, he has a lot of RBI—he’s also hitting at a prime RBI-garnering spot in the lineup. He hits well enough (fourth in AVG of all rookies with enough at-bats to qualify, after Pedroia, Willits, and Tulowitzki). But that’s it. He never walks. Not a power threat. His defense is acceptable, but it’s not going to help him win any prizes. And the schmancy stats (eg, VORP) don’t favor him at all. Aside from the RBI, why do you like this guy? Because he doesn’t play for the Red Sox?

Report this comment

]]> By: Pete http://umpbump.com/press/2007/10/03/were-2-were-2/comment-page-1/#comment-53251 Pete Thu, 04 Oct 2007 19:32:51 +0000 http://umpbump.com/press/were-2-were-2/#comment-53251 Hindsight's a bitch, eh? Good luck next year! ;) Hindsight’s a bitch, eh?

Good luck next year! ;)

Report this comment

]]> By: Paul Moro http://umpbump.com/press/2007/10/03/were-2-were-2/comment-page-1/#comment-53250 Paul Moro Thu, 04 Oct 2007 19:29:13 +0000 http://umpbump.com/press/were-2-were-2/#comment-53250 And I'd STILL be making fun of it. And I’d STILL be making fun of it.

Report this comment

]]>