Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Barry Larkin

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Otis Nixon's Bodyguard
    replied
    Originally posted by SABR Matt View Post
    The Yankees don't know how to build a team...they spend money on players but they don't fit well together emotionally or sabermetrically...the team has become increasingly unstable, and increasingly flawed. They make no attempt to field a competent team defense, they focus on big name pitchers, most of whom are over or near 30 when they get to New York, many of whom flamed out horribly upon their arrival. They don't spend their money on good back-up plans the way Boston does (when a big name player stops producing as is the case with Ortiz, Boston has competent major league bench players who can step up and keep that spot from being a black hole...when the Yankees lose A-Rod, they play Cody farking Ransom...LOL), and they don't emphasize player development. Not to mention the way they horribly mistreated Torre.
    That post is full of good points. With the money they spend (approximately 50% more than any other Major League team), if the Yankees don't win the division every single year, they're a monumental failure as a team. Why do they routinely sign high-profile pitchers who are past their primes? It would only mildly surprise me if they offered Tom Glavine a 2-year/$10 million deal.

    Leave a comment:


  • SavoyBG
    replied
    Originally posted by SABR Matt View Post
    The Yankees don't know how to build a team...they spend money on players but they don't fit well together emotionally or sabermetrically...the team has become increasingly unstable, and increasingly flawed. They make no attempt to field a competent team defense, they focus on big name pitchers, most of whom are over or near 30 when they get to New York, many of whom flamed out horribly upon their arrival. They don't spend their money on good back-up plans the way Boston does (when a big name player stops producing as is the case with Ortiz, Boston has competent major league bench players who can step up and keep that spot from being a black hole...when the Yankees lose A-Rod, they play Cody farking Ransom...LOL), and they don't emphasize player development. Not to mention the way they horribly mistreated Torre.

    It's no accident that Boston pulled ahead of New York in putting a team together just after they hired BJ.

    Their outfield defense right now is brutal. Only Melky can throw, and the corner outfielders (Damon and Swisher) at the moment are really bad. The infield is not any better at 2B and SS. The only position where they have even an above average fielder is 1B.

    A-Rod is 3 for his last 34 and is "resting" tonight and tomorrow in Florida. He's now at .212 for the season.

    Leave a comment:


  • SABR Matt
    replied
    The Yankees don't know how to build a team...they spend money on players but they don't fit well together emotionally or sabermetrically...the team has become increasingly unstable, and increasingly flawed. They make no attempt to field a competent team defense, they focus on big name pitchers, most of whom are over or near 30 when they get to New York, many of whom flamed out horribly upon their arrival. They don't spend their money on good back-up plans the way Boston does (when a big name player stops producing as is the case with Ortiz, Boston has competent major league bench players who can step up and keep that spot from being a black hole...when the Yankees lose A-Rod, they play Cody farking Ransom...LOL), and they don't emphasize player development. Not to mention the way they horribly mistreated Torre.

    Leave a comment:


  • SavoyBG
    replied
    Originally posted by SABR Matt View Post
    LOL!

    Well to be fair Jeter seems to be playing a little better up the middle the last couple of seasons, but yes...he's not a good role model for training young shortstops at defensive positioning OR fundamentals and footwork.

    That stupid play when he dove into the stands after making a pretty good running catch....there's actually some schmucks around here in the NY area who think it was one of the greatest plays they ever saw. The other team's SS made an even better play on a deep popup down the LF line in the same game, but since he wasn't as clumsy as Jeter, he didn't need to dive into the stands after the catch.

    The Yankees have not won anything since Jeter was named captain in June of 2003. Actually the team has gotten progressively worse in every season since then. "Captain Collapse" presided over the biggest collapse in the history of post season sports in 2004, against Boston.

    Here's what the team has done since Jeter was named captain.

    2003 - lost world series
    2004 - lost ALCS after leading thre games to none.....LOL
    2005 - lost in first round in 5 games
    2006 - lost in first round in 4 games
    2007 - wild card - lost in first round in 4 games
    2008 - did not make playoffs....LOL
    Last edited by SavoyBG; 06-19-2009, 10:30 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • SABR Matt
    replied
    LOL!

    Well to be fair Jeter seems to be playing a little better up the middle the last couple of seasons, but yes...he's not a good role model for training young shortstops at defensive positioning OR fundamentals and footwork.

    Leave a comment:


  • SavoyBG
    replied
    Originally posted by SABR Matt View Post
    Alomar's trademark play was ranging to his left to catch foul flies and bloopers to short right. He did that well much like Jeter handles pop-ups well. He was not very good going up the middle, though he was certainly better at it than Jeter.
    My 79 year old father would be better at it than Jeter.

    Leave a comment:


  • SABR Matt
    replied
    Alomar's trademark play was ranging to his left to catch foul flies and bloopers to short right. He did that well much like Jeter handles pop-ups well. He was not very good going up the middle, though he was certainly better at it than Jeter.

    Leave a comment:


  • SavoyBG
    replied
    Originally posted by Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan View Post
    I know Alomar slowed down defensively later in his career, but when he was with the Blue Jays he was a tremendous defensive player. I know the likes of Sabr Matt might discount this claim because its anecdotal, but I watched hundreds of Blue Jay games then and Alomar was a gold glove fielder. Maybe because the turf was so fast at Skydome his range factor was unfairly diminished or whatever, but he was fantastic defensively then. It's not hard to understand why: good fielding %, excellent speed, agile... there's no way he could be anything less than very good. You simply cannot win 5 GG's for the Blue Jays unless you really can pick it.

    As for who was the better player, I can't believe its even a debate. Alomar hands down, if nothing else, for his ability to stay in the lineup.
    Alomar's rep as a great fielder came solely because he made a lot of great plays going to his left, or at least they seemed to be great plays, probably because other 2Bmen would have gotten to the same balls without diving. I agree with Matt, the guy was vastly overrated as a fielder, just like Jeter.

    Leave a comment:


  • SABR Matt
    replied
    Alomar's defensive career by PCA:
    Code:
    Ps	Yr	EqG	Wins	PCA-BA
    2B	1997	103	3.14	0.319
    2B	1999	147	3.83	0.299
    2B	1988	141	3.18	0.284
    2B	1991	159	3.32	0.277
    2B	1990	133	2.75	0.275
    2B	2003	62	1.22	0.271
    2B	1998	142	2.57	0.264
    2B	1995	126	2.25	0.263
    2B	1996	137	2.31	0.259
    2B	1993	146	2.35	0.256
    2B	1989	154	2.49	0.256
    2B	1994	98	1.45	0.250
    2B	2000	151	2.18	0.248
    2B	1992	139	1.62	0.236
    2B	2003	64	0.73	0.235
    2B	2001	150	1.48	0.228
    2B	2002	139	1.10	0.220
    2B	2004	21	0.10	0.205
    He showed flashes of ability as an Oriole and Indian...but he was, statistically, a below average fielder for his entire stay in Toronto. I'd always heard that astroturf was easier to field...not harder. You get true hops on turf...it does make for faster grounder speed, though, so it's possible this is a case where the existing fielding analyses are missing something...I just think there's a danger in being wow'ed by someone who looks slick but doesn't really get results (Griffey Jr. in Seattle, for example).

    Leave a comment:


  • Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan
    replied
    Originally posted by SABR Matt View Post
    Oh he had a tremendous fielding reputation...but no sabermetric tool has thus far been able to find any evidence whatsoever supporting any claim that Alomar was even an average defensive second baseman, let alone a good one.
    I know Alomar slowed down defensively later in his career, but when he was with the Blue Jays he was a tremendous defensive player. I know the likes of Sabr Matt might discount this claim because its anecdotal, but I watched hundreds of Blue Jay games then and Alomar was a gold glove fielder. Maybe because the turf was so fast at Skydome his range factor was unfairly diminished or whatever, but he was fantastic defensively then. It's not hard to understand why: good fielding %, excellent speed, agile... there's no way he could be anything less than very good. You simply cannot win 5 GG's for the Blue Jays unless you really can pick it.

    As for who was the better player, I can't believe its even a debate. Alomar hands down, if nothing else, for his ability to stay in the lineup.

    Leave a comment:


  • SABR Matt
    replied
    Oh he had a tremendous fielding reputation...but no sabermetric tool has thus far been able to find any evidence whatsoever supporting any claim that Alomar was even an average defensive second baseman, let alone a good one.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chadwick
    replied
    Originally posted by SABR Matt View Post
    Larkin was a better player in his prime seasons than Alomar because Larkin was a good fielder, Alomar was not.
    I still remember that SI issue that said Alomar was the greatest fielding second baseman in history.

    Leave a comment:


  • SABR Matt
    replied
    Larkin was a better player in his prime seasons than Alomar because Larkin was a good fielder, Alomar was not.

    Leave a comment:


  • mtortolero
    replied
    The differences in acumulative stats between Alomar and Larkin are more or less the value of two average seasons:
    Total difference...........1343 PA 179 runs 384 H 63 2B 12 Hr 174 RBI
    two average seasons of 671 PA 89 runs 192 H 32 2B 6 Hr 87 RBI
    The funny thing is Larkin was active 19 seasons vs 17 seasons of Alomar.
    Bad for Larkin was so injury prone while was an active player.

    Leave a comment:


  • Otis Nixon's Bodyguard
    replied
    It took me a long time to make up my mind about Larkin's HOF candidacy, and I'm not sure why. Although I don't think he was quite the player that Roberto Alomar was, I think he clearly belongs in.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X