Here's the 2006 stats from five players. You tell me which you'd want most:
R RBI SB BA SLG BB K
61 68 1 .292 .477 55 69
82 92 5 .310 .497 55 96
93 62 52 .267 .393 65 100
73 34 19 .279 .404 30 92
101 85 8 .270 .553 63 162
Top to bottom, Player No. 3 would seem to be the best of the bunch, followed by No. 2. It's a toss up for third place between No. 5 and No. 1 -- if you can afford the strikeouts, you would probably take No. 5.
But if you're Tom, you take Player No. 1 over any of them. Why? Because his name is Jeff Kent, and he is one of Tom's pet players. Anyone who doesn't share Tom's love of his pet players, such as Jason Smith and myself, gets his scorn.
As you'll notice, the other players in the comparison are, in respective order, Lyle Overbay, Chone Figgins, Rickie Weeks and Bill Hall. Those are the players that Jason kept instead of Kent, which Tom criticized, but only Weeks had clearly inferior numbers last year -- and besides being 14 years younger than Kent, Weeks missed about half the year with injury. Indeed, the best player of the bunch last year was Figgins, whom Tom has previously dubbed one of the most overrated players in baseball.
Keep that in mind next time Tom criticizes your personnel decisions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Are you kidding me Adam? Kent was hurt last year! But you still use raw, gross numbers to make your case?
Secondly, Jason didn't keep Hall! He traded him to Oedipus for Rickie Weeks.
If one uses per game stats, Kent magically becomes first among that group in RBI, BBs, and lowest in Ks.
I know his age doesn't mean he's that great for a rebuilding team, but I'd bet a drink that Jeff Kent a.) has a better year than Weeks, and b.) is one of the 10 best 2Bmen in the league in 2007.
Post a Comment