Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 2 of 2 pages
Again I don't see anything historically significant about being a guy who put up a few great post season series for a particular franchise.
I have an anti-boston fan sentiment. Nothing against the franchise itself, but the fans put an importance on their franchise that is utterly ridiculous bordering on insane. They think they are the second most important franchise in history and act like the other franchises are lucky to be sharing the stage with them. I don't see any difference between the Red Sox and the Pirates or Reds (well actually I think the Reds are a more important historical franchise but that is a minor detail) or any of the other original (post 1903) franchises.
As to Ortiz in particular....there just is not enough on his resume to put him in the hof.
More to the point, I like the Cards. I have no anti-Card bias. But you have made it clear, in more than one post, that your anti-Boston sentiment is overboard enough
that your opinions on Ortiz's HOF worthiness can be dismissed.
Were you a judge, you'd have been removed from this particular case.
Would someone's PRO-Boston bias be enough to disqualify them?
Just curious...which franchises would you consider to not be "storied and iconic."..... I guess you have the last few expansion teams of course....but what do the Red Sox bring to the table that the Pirates don't? Or the Reds or Tiger or Braves or Cardinals or Dodgers or Giants or A's or Cubs etc?
Otherwise, what's to recommend him over Giambi or Delgado?
This is Juan Gonzalez we're discussing, right?
Tenace actually out-WARs Ortiz to date, 47-44.
If your point is that Gene Tenace was on any level in the same class as Ortiz, then you are
a) too young to have seen them both play
b) if a) doesn't apply and you still believe they are in the same class, then I'm not sure how to respond.
Did you watch Tenace throughout his career or are you just relying on these stats?
BTW, Tenace was not an especially good defender so to elevate him b/c he played 2 positions is somewhat misleading.
I don't see a huge difference between Edmonds and Williams. (I'll assume we both agree Edmonds is more valuable.)
That puts "not remotely in the same class" into - well, a pickle.
Otherwise, what's to recommend him over Giambi or Delgado?
His post-season success is historic and makes it more of an apples and oranges comparison.
but what do the Red Sox bring to the table that the Pirates don't?
Either I'm mis-reading your comments, or you are mis-reading mine. I'm not the one that put "not remotely same class" out there, my comment was a sarcastic reply to the not in the same class comment, that is why the question mark was in that sentence.
Postseason success is irrelevant to me, but Giambi has a .911 OPS in the postseason. Delgado has a 1.199 OPS in the postseason. How in the world do you have Ortiz distancing himself against those two based on the postseason? Do people even think about what they're saying when they make these sorts of arguments?
Ortiz has 357 post-season plate appearances over 17 series where his team has won 12 of 17 series.
Giambi has 174 post-season plate appearances over 10 series where his team has won 2 of 10 series.
Delgado has a whopping 43 post-season plate appearances in his 2 series (1W, 1L).
I am old enough to have seen Tenace's career, yes. Did we think he was a big star at the time compared to Ortiz now? No. Did we recognize his excellent on-base skills and usefulness as a sometime-catcher as adding another strong bat to an offense? Not very well. Were we wrong to do so? Yes.
The fourth is a bear.
The Phillies, White Sox, Browns/Orioles, Cubs, and Senators were simply to long term awful for contention.
Carlos Delgado currently has a career pretty much indistinguishable from Ortiz's.
I think plenty of people who feel Ortiz will end up in the Hall feel like he wouldn't qualify under the hit-by-bus rule at the moment.
things matter, despite Ray's semi-coherent protests of exhibition game-level significance,
then I'm not sure how to respond.
"Oh, we wouldn't put him in right now based only on his MLB performance; but he will do enough in MLB before his career is over."
David Ortiz wishes he could have hit in the 2013 World Series the way Juan Gonzalez hit in the 1996 ALDS. Three tie-breaking home runs and a game-tying home run. Someone should have told the Yankees he "could be pitched to," so they wouldn't have wasted their time issuing multiple walks with multiple games on the line.
How many runs did he cost the Red Sox over the years by forcing Boston to use Manny Ramirez in LF?
Ortiz has a collection of huge PS moments in combination with rate stats compiled over a large number of PA's under compelling circumstances narrative-wise that is unmatched by any other hitter. Its a four-faceted resume. Taken together, it stands alone.
Kevin Millar's OF defense, which makes Manny Ramirez look great, is what "forced" Boston to use Manny Ramirez in LF. If they could have done Millar LF / Ortiz 1B / Ramirez DH and been better off I'm sure they would have. But the improvement at 1B was not enough to offset the dropoff in LF.
And in each case they did not hesitate to give Ortiz the 1B duties in NL parks. When forced to choose between Ortiz and their regular 1B, they most often chose Ortiz at 1B.
The point is that in a world where David Ortiz doesn't play for the Red Sox, they can use a different crappy fielder as their DH, instead of forcing that player to play the field. So he effectively cost the team the number of defensive runs' worth of difference between their worst fielder and a replacement-level defender at the position.
This argument suggests that in Pujols' years with the Cardinals he "forced" the team's worst defender to play higher in the defensive spectrum than he should, because shifting downward to 1B was not feasible.
but in the grand scheme of things, his performance in the 2013 world series will not be a significant factor in whether he makes it or not. say he plays for five more years and then is retired for five additional years, making it ten years from now. his hall of fame case at that time will rest on his body of work in the regular season. post-season performance is only used in rare "close" cases to tip the balance one way or the other.
tfbg, you do realize that the vast majority of baseball fans and baseball writers do not give a crap about the red sox, right?
But the main reason I made my remarks is to respond to the absurd suggestion that there is nothing particularly special about Ortiz as a PS hitter, and Juan Gonzales in comparable. David Ortiz is the most well-known post season hero of our time, the #1 guy since Reggie. That is gonna get him some votes. His body of work is unequaled among his contemporaries.
Even if it's granted that WAR gets it just right for Tenace's defensive adjustments and their career values are comparable, it's pretty silly to pretend they're similar players. Looking at career OPS+ alone misses about 2,700 more PA's for Ortiz. Another four full seasons of 650+ PA's, or 50% more than Tenace. Then there's peak, another huge difference. Best five seasons for Ortiz 171, 161, 160 158, 154, and a half season of 173. Tenace 149, 145, 139, 139, 137. His only "seasons" above that were with only 128 and 165 PA's. Regardless of what you think about value, Ortiz and Tenace are not similar players and pointing to career OPS+ is sloppy in this case.
I don't think that's a fair comparison because first base is a position and designated hitter is not.
Also, any costs to the Cardinals by using Pujols at first are already broadly reflected in the positional adjustment to his numbers. But because DH as a non-position doesn't have a set positional value, it's always going to need to be contextualized against the rest of the team.
Exhibit B: David Ortiz, 2013 ALCS. .091, but one of those two hits was a doozy. That at-bat is a welcome and valued part of the "narrative," of course. The other at-bats are meaningless minutia.
Beltran is a legit borderline hofer, and nobody is bothering to make the claim that with his post season heroics he should be moved to inner circle territory.
And yet he's (Ortiz) arguably has been inferior to Carlos Beltran in the post season, just has a better world series resume.
That at-bat is a welcome and valued part of the "narrative," of course. The other at-bats are meaningless minutia.
Who is suggesting Ortiz is inner circle? What the hell?
I think he's HOVG now. I think he will get, maybe, enshrinement with 500 HR's.
I think you're so sensitive to East Coast Bias that you have a blind spot in the other direction. Is Enos Slaughter in the HOF without his mad dash?
Well, that's childish.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (3 members)
Page rendered in 0.9283 seconds, 57 querie(s) executed