Originally posted by EvanAparra
i just mean that Pedro was so ridiculously good while a member of the team, his relatively short tenure could be overlooked. Nomar wasn't anything close to that good.
I'm not the Nomar fan that most sox fans are, when he was healthy i liked him because i sympathize with any player overshadowed by derek jeter, but it really seemed that in 2004 he was nothing short of a cancer to the team. teammates complained about him privately, he didn't seem to care about the games to nearly the degree his teammates did, and while he was very good with the red sox, he wasn't close to pedro's level.
so yeah, what i really mean is that pedro wasn't there long enough, and nomar wasn't there long enough. but pedro was SO good while he was there that his short tenure doesn't mean much to me, whereas nomar was very good, but not good enough to overlook the short time he spend with the team.
Leave a comment: