Nov
13

Open Thread: You have the Red Sox

By

You have the Red Sox

How awesome is that? Big thanks to Stephen (the artist formerly known as “sic”), Greg, and Christian for photoshopping that puppy. Here’s the original Nike ad if you missed it.

Now that there’s a smile on your face, feel free to use this as your open thread. The Nets, Knicks, and Islanders are all in action tonight, but I suspect you’d rather watch linoleum curl than those three disasters (combined record: 7-28).  Anything goes, just be civil.

Categories : Open Thread

149 Comments»

  1. Salty Buggah says:

    That is awesome

  2. “The Nets, Knicks, and Islanders are all in action tonight, but I suspect you’d rather watch linoleum curl than those three disasters (combined record: 7-28).”

    The Isles are 3 points behind the Rags and have played one less game. Just sayin’.

  3. Salty Buggah says:

    I’m a huge slacker. I have to finish 2 research papers and another paper by Sunday night and I spent my past hour watching the archives of A-Rod’s 1st pitch HR, Damon’s walk-off, A-Rod’s walk-off, Melky’s walkoff, A-Rod’s walk-off vs. Boston, and some other walk-offs.

    • Mr G Feeny says:

      Dude, so funny. I’m in my library doing the exact same thing. About to watch a montage of sterling calls for the big moments in the post-season. Thought I’d be doing some work on a Friday night…nope…

    • Steve H says:

      There are some times when I wish I was back in school……thanks for reminding me why I’m glad I’m not.

  4. RichYF says:

    Disclaimer: Old argument.
    Second Disclaimer: Devils’ advocate only. I love me some Robbie.

    Bringing up last night’s argument about Cano, his value to the Yanks, and trading him for a “more” valuable commodity:

    1. Isn’t it possible that it truly is the Yankees (read: their fans) that are over-valuing Cano?
    2. What do we call the Swisher deal? A fair trade?
    3. Isn’t is possible that there are other GMs out there that believe Cano can/will turn into the player that we the fans believe he can be? Isn’t it, then, worth exploring a trade with these GMs would *may* be overvaluing Robbie and will then, in turn, trade a more valuable commodity for him?

    My counter-argument to the “let’s jump on Don” parade is simply that it is possible that he is correct in his assumptions about Robbie. Whether or not I agree is irrelevant. The point is that it is feasible that there are other people around baseball that believe Robbie is primed to become more than he may or may not become. His career path is unknown (as is that of every player). If another team’s GM over-values him (very possible), it would be silly of Cash to not capitalize on this.

    I will not speculate on who could or could not be had for Robbie, I simply believe that if it is believed by some that he will fail and believed by others that he will excel, then there is definitely room for discussion about his future (or lack thereof).

    If Cash and his people believe Robinson Cano has peaked as a player and he can find another GM that believe he hasn’t, the value received for Cano would be greater than Cano himself. It would therefore be a good trade for the Yankees.

    I doubt this will happen, but I read a lot of comments bashing a man for an opinion that I did not believe to be as off-base as perceived at the time by others.

    • I hear you re: the bashing. It’s like a feeding frenzy around here sometimes, commenters see someone they can score some cheap points by bashing and they all gang up to get their shots in. Don may have been wrong, and he certainly didn’t put forward the strongest arguments to support his conclusion, but he didn’t deserve to be ganged-up on and to then have people bring up his name and argument in other threads just to mock him.

      • Salty Buggah says:

        “he didn’t deserve to be ganged-up on and to then have people bring up his name and argument in other threads just to mock him.”

        When did that happen? I havent been around today

        • I’m not saying this to be a dick, but you can go into the threads and check it out for yourself. I’m not interested in calling anyone out by name, I don’t think that’s necessary and I don’t think this is that big a deal. To back up my statement I’ll just assure you that it happened, I didn’t make it up.

          • Salty Buggah says:

            Yea, I wasnt doubting you. I just asked which thread. It’s not really that bad. And I didnt ask for who called him out, just when this happened. I couldnt care less about who said what.

    • Salty Buggah says:

      I think the comments acknowledged that what he said wasn’t that off-base. But his reasoning was not good. Is it possible that Cano has peaked? Yea, sure but its not probable at all. The Swisher trade was a different type of deal as Cashmoney bought low and Ozzie wanted him gone. He said that he wanted Kemp for Cano, which is not possible and would not be good as we would be giving an additional piece of significance too, leading to the Yanks perhaps losing value. Then he wanted Jackson for Cano, which is dumb for the reasons everyone stated. He was saying how he’s sure that Cano will be traded and how there are rumors about him being traded, which is not true. Then he started talking about he knows baseball since he supposedly worked in it and started bashing me about using Fangraphs and told me to learn about the game itself, which I obviously knew more about than him. That’s what he was getting bashed for, not his idea of trading Cano. I am more than open to trading Cano if we can somehow get someone better than him…but that is very very very unlikely.

      • “That’s what he was getting bashed for, not his idea of trading Cano. I am more than open to trading Cano if we can somehow get someone better than him.”

        False. He got bashed for saying he wanted to trade Cano for someone more valuable.

        • Salty Buggah says:

          Not really. It was more for his reasoning (at least that’s what I was disagreeing with). Trading Cano for Kemp isn’t likely and probably not that good. He just kept sltering his points and I guess kept digging a deeper hole from there.

          • Don: “I think he has great value and we should use that value to acquire someone who contributes in more ways than Cano does. Its as simple as that.”

            You: “Which GM would be idiotic enough to trade someone with more value than Cano for Cano?”

            I guess I see the exchange above differently than you do. There were also plenty of insulting comments being tossed around in that thread.

            Look, it’s no biggie and I don’t want to have an argument with anyone about it. Obviously I like the regulars here or else I wouldn’t participate in the comments here (I can count the comments I’ve left on other sites on one hand). I just think sometimes some people can get a little petty with the criticism and there’s a bit of a mob mentality to it that I’m not too fond of. Just one man’s opinion and one I don’t feel the need to share often, it’s not a very big deal at all.

            • Salty Buggah says:

              Yea, I guess we see it differently. I wasn’t doing anything to bash him there, just his logic and reasoning. Also, in that comment I was also referring to this earlier statement, which was similar to what he said in the one you posted, by him.

              “The Yanks can get greater value out of a CF or SP of equal value.”

              • Again, as I’ve said all day when this has come up… He said the whole thing exceedingly poorly, but it doesn’t take a huge leap to understand what he meant. This idea that the Yankees, or anyone, can’t make a trade and receive more value than they lose is kind of ridiculous. If it was true nobody would ever make a trade, every trade is made because both teams believe they’re receiving more value than they are losing. That was all he meant. If the Yankees can get a player of Cano’s talent-level back, he thinks that player, depending on who it is (as he stipulated that we have no idea who the Yankees could actually get), would be more valuable to the Yankees than Cano is.

                I don’t necessarily agree and I don’t think its a realistic idea, especially without any knowledge about what kind of deal they could find for Cano, but what he said, if you just take a moment to try to hear his intent instead of killing him for his lack of eloquence, wasn’t nearly as stupid or crazy as a lot of comments made it out to be.

                • Salty Buggah says:

                  Again, I just said that his idea wasn’t that unreasonable but nearly everything else was.

                • But that’s not what you said last night. It’s cool of you to say that now, but I’m not talking about this thread. I’m talking about the thread last night, and last night you argued with him by saying “Which GM would be idiotic enough to trade someone with more value than Cano for Cano?”

                  Dude, it’s no biggie, but if you don’t feel like that statement is true just say so and move on instead of continuing to deny that you said what you said. There’s nothing wrong with saying ‘my bad, that’s not what I really think,’ or even ‘my bad, that statement was wrong.’

                • Salty Buggah says:

                  No I stand by that statement. I was arguing that it will not be possible to find a GM that will trade a player that will be more valuable than Cano for Cano.

                  He said in his original comment: “For me he is another Alfonso Soriano. He is nothing more than a complimentary player on a very good team and there are far more high quality 2B around than CF or SP so its time to move him at his highest value. Im sticking to my guns of targeting a player like Matt Kemp or Matt Cain with a package based around Cano, and then signing a Hudson, Derosa, or Figgins.”

                  That to me is somewhat reasonable (only somewhat). But when he goes to argue and say contradictory things like “The Yanks can get greater value out of a CF or SP of equal value,” that’s when I argue against him.

                  My response to his first post was: “Getting a guy like Kemp with Cano alone isn’t obviously enough. You have to give up another fairly significant piece to get him. And honestly, no matter how good Kemp is/may get, giving up 2 pieces 2 fill one “hole” (I say it like that because CF is not really a hole with Gardbrera filling in adequately there) is not a smart thing to do.”

                  Then I went to argue his reasoning for trading Cano, never saying that trading Cano is a bad idea.

                • I’ll leave you with this:

                  I won’t address silly trade proposals or any of that other stuff. You made the following statement: ” Which GM would be idiotic enough to trade someone with more value than Cano for Cano?” Do you stand-by that statement, 100%?

                  If you do, you’re just being stubborn. The majority of trades made in MLB history feature one team receiving more value than their trading partner. I keep repeating this one point and you keep going off on all these tangents, and I think you keep going to all these other tangents because you don’t want to answer that one simple question posed above, but that’s all I’m really getting at here.

                  Take it easy.

                • Salty Buggah says:

                  Well, if you noticed, I did start my previous post by saying, “No, I stand by that statement.” And I dont see how it makes me stubborn. I honestly do not think any GM will trade someone like Kemp (or anyone with more value, or at least currently has more value because we cant project the future) for Cano, especially when there are several stop-gap solutions in the market. And honestly, you keep going off on tangents. I was arguing why I disagree with him mostly and his reasoning (while agreeing, or at least not disagreeing, that Cano CAN be traded) and how no one in that thread really bashed him. You keep asking that one question which is irrelevant to what I’m saying.

                  I guess maybe you and I probably disagree on what is being said in that question. I will say this though. I dont agree with my statement a complete 100%. It’s more like 99% because it IS possible some GM will make a dumb trade like that but not probable.

                • V says:

                  D00d, HCM, Don was being a humongous OAKTAG. Sorry people ‘ganged up on him’, but if you come out saying STUPID THINGS like ‘trade Cano for Jackson’, you’re going to get called on it.

                  Let’s leave the ‘let’s all be friends’ schtick for intelligent posters who can actually defend their reasoning intelligently.

                • V – There’s a difference between disagreeing with someone and insulting and mocking them. I never said anyone shouldn’t be called-out if they say something dumb. And I clearly don’t really have a problem with snarkiness/mocking – for instance, I think your use of the words “DOOd” and “OAKTAG” in the same sentence is totally amazing and shows that you’re one of the “intelligent posters” you referred to – I just didn’t think he necessarily deserved the group-mocking and I thought people were just getting cheap shots in at him for the sake of scoring points with the other commenters, and I think that’s lame. I’m not saying ‘let’s all be friends,’ I think there’s a distinction between what I’m saying and what you’re implying I’m saying. Perhaps that’s not clear to you.

                • “Well, if you noticed, I did start my previous post by saying, ‘No, I stand by that statement.’ And I dont see how it makes me stubborn.”

                  Because you continually say there’s nothing wrong with saying you want to trade Cano for something more valuable, then continually try to make the case that saying you want to trade Cano for something more valuable is wrong. You don’t want to admit you were wrong, and I get that, it’s a normal reaction. But it’s a stubborn and obtuse reaction.

                  “I honestly do not think any GM will trade someone like Kemp (or anyone with more value, or at least currently has more value because we cant project the future) for Cano, especially when there are several stop-gap solutions in the market.”

                  That’s not an answer to the question though, it’s a tangent. You’re evading the actual question. The question was whether you stand by your statement that it would be idiotic for someone to trade for Cano and give up more value than he received, a statement made with the intent to tell Don that it’s stupid to want to trade Cano because it’s theoretically, let alone realistically, impossible to get the wanted-return for him. I think the vast majority of trades that have occurred in MLB history have resulted in one team acquiring more value than the other team, so I don’t think it’s fair to criticize the idea of trading Cano by saying it’s impossible for the Yankees to do so and receive more value than they lose.

                  “And honestly, you keep going off on tangents. I was arguing why I disagree with him mostly and his reasoning (while agreeing, or at least not disagreeing, that Cano CAN be traded) and how no one in that thread really bashed him. You keep asking that one question which is irrelevant to what I’m saying.”

                  So I keep going off on tangents… by asking the same question and discussing the same topic in every single one of my comments in this thread!? I’m sorry, but that doesn’t make any sense at all. You keep going to tangents because you don’t want to look at your own statements critically, which is understandable if not unfortunate, but I keep sticking to the same discrete issue. I’m sorry, but if you think I’m going off on tangents then I don’t think you understand the meaning of that term.

                  “I guess maybe you and I probably disagree on what is being said in that question.”

                  Perhaps, but seeing as how I’ve touched on this issue in every one of my comments in this particular conversation and asked the question different ways in order to get you to answer it, and seeing as how you’re a pretty intelligent person, I think my intent is pretty clear to you. You know what I’m asking and you could answer the question I’m asking if you wanted to, you just don’t want to.

                  “I will say this though. I dont agree with my statement a complete 100%. It’s more like 99% because it IS possible some GM will make a dumb trade like that but not probable.”

                  If you need to hedge your answer that much in order to finally, honestly evaluate your own statements and answer the question… i’ll take it.

                  Thank you for finally answering, in the most hedged manner possible, my non-tangential question. Good grief that was like pulling teeth.

                  (If I might be so bold – and this is a general statement as opposed to a statement intended for one commenter… The idea is what is important, not the person stating the idea. We shouldn’t be so slow to evaluate the things we say, there’s way too much pride-of-authorship around here that gets in the way of the progress of the discourse. And with that, I look forward to burying this conversation… How freaking tedious is this? ::shoots self in head with finger-gun::)

      • RichYF says:

        I agree that the argument spun out of control quickly, but it was what 3AM? There were 2-3 people antagonizing him before things went sour.

        I first read the post and saw some interesting discussion. It then turned into a bash-fest and a “who’s better than who” argument where statistics and reason were simply fronts.

        As an outsider, I just thought it got a little too personal and a little too petty. The baseball argument was sound and I think there were some good points on both sides. Unfortunately, the arguments that were used to invalidate the other’s point were the most petty of the logical arguments (e.g. trading for Edwin Jackson).

        I feel that, as Mondesi stated, RAB sometimes gets out of hand when people have objecting viewpoints and I am simply trying to shed light on such a situation.

        Rather than just simply bashing someone or disregarding commentary from them, my opinion (strictly mine as I mean no offense to anyone) is that, as a community, we should embrace views which are “off the beaten path” and try to expand our views.

        Now, don’t get me wrong, sometimes people are wayyyyy off that path or very hard-headed. But, in my opinion, Don was being rational and only responded poorly after having several others jump on him and saying his arguments were stupid, dumb, etc.

        My biggest objection to all of it was that I was truly enjoying reading the conversation before it got personal. Both sides made valid points and my original stance was swayed by both. That’s how we improve together as fans, in my humble opinion.

        • Salty Buggah says:

          I agree with most of your points. Looking back at that conversation, I think his first comment was probably reasonable but then it went pretty downhill from there with him saying some irrational and clearly biased things.

          • Dude, nobody’s saying his arguments were persuasive. But that doesn’t necessarily give people the right to gang up and bash him. He stayed pretty calm throughout the whole conversation(s) considering the snark and insults thrown his way and it was just a bit much considering he was just someone making a bad argument, not someone looking to be a dick.

            • Salty Buggah says:

              “But that doesn’t necessarily give people the right to gang up and bash him.”

              Agreed, but when he bashes people, I think its acceptable. After seeing the original thread again, I don’t really think anyone ganged up on him to bash him (at least not in that thread, maybe in the 2nd thread, which Im about to read).

        • Hey ZZ says:

          It is unbelievable to me how undervalued Cano is. Lets take Matt Kemp for example: The supposed superstar that everyone thinks is much more valuable than Cano.

          Matt Kemp is better than Cano at two things: Speed and Defense. And his defense is not spectacular. He is an above average defender but far from a huge difference maker. On offense Cano is either even with Kemp or better in every single category.

          Someone please explain to me why Kemp is considered a superstar and Cano could actually be called a complementary player.

          I will start the discussion with this stat:

          2009 OPS+

          Kemp: 125
          Cano: 129

          • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

            Cano is a superstar. Whether he looks and acts like one or not, the numbers say he is.

          • WAR:

            Kemp: 5
            Cano: 4.4

            Kemp is 2 years younger.

            I’m not calling Cano a complementary player or downplaying his talent here, but Kemp is really good. They’re both stars, and its pretty reasonably to like Kemp over Cano.

            • Hey ZZ says:

              I said Kemp is a better defender but as you can see from the only slight difference in WAR, Kemp is not a difference maker on defense.

              On offense their values on fangraphs:

              Kemp: 23.2
              Cano: 23.9

              Cano also plays a more valuable position than Kemp. I am not saying Cano is better than Kemp, but in my mind they are even. Cano is slightly better offensively. Kemp is better defensively.

              • JMK aka The Overshare says:

                2B is not a more valuable position than CF.

                • Hey ZZ says:

                  Based purely on my observations which do not really amount to anything I think it is harder to find a really good 2b than a really good CF

                • Let’s take a look, using WAR…

                  Top 5 2b:
                  1. Zobrist 8.6
                  2. Utley 7.6
                  3. Pedroia 5.2
                  4. Kinsler 4.6
                  5. Lopez 4.6
                  (Cano was 6th in 2009)

                  Top 5 CF:
                  1. Gutierrez 5.9
                  2. Kemp 5.0
                  3. Morgan 4.9
                  4. Cameron 4.3
                  5. Bourn 4.2

                  Average WAR among qualifying players in 2009:
                  2B: 3.36
                  CF: 2.78

                  Median WAR among qualifying players in 2009:
                  2B: 2.9
                  CF: 2.4

                  It looks like your observations might not be accurate, at least with 2009 data.

                • Hey ZZ says:

                  Fair enough. I do wonder why defense is valued on the same level as offense though. Defense is certainly valuable but offensive contributions has to be considered more valuable right?

                  I find it hard to believe Franklin Gutierrez and is 103 OPS+ was more valuable then Kemp in CF

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  Studies show that offense is far more valuable than defense. I have a Sports Illustrated article in my house that used UZR to prove it.

                  Yeah, that is a bit puzzling.

              • I don’t think one is a superstar and one isn’t… Honestly, I don’t know that I’ve ever heard anyone call either of them a superstar, it’s not like Kemp gets mentioned in the same breath as the best players in the game. I think you’re kind of setting up a straw-man by arguing that people call Kemp a superstar but don’t call Cano a superstar.

                As far as the comparison between the two players, you probably sense that Kemp gets held in a bit higher regard because Cano had a shit 2008 (which affects impressions of him), Kemp is a better defender (and he plays a premium position, it’s not like we’re comparing a catcher and a first baseman here), and he’s 2 years younger than Cano. The age thing is pretty important here.

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  He also plays in the NL. You can’t discount that.

                • Does WAR account for that? Is there some relatively accepted value that can be added to an AL player’s WAR to account for it?

                  Whatever… Either way, I think the AL/NL thing matters a bit, but probably not as much as you’re implying. Matt Kemp would be really good in the AL, he’s not just a product of the NL.

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  He would be very, very good in the AL, but not as gooad as in the NL. I don’t think the difference is negligible; look at Matt Holliday, and then there are the pitchers…

                  But would he be worse, better, or the same as Cano in the AL? I think that’s pretty much impossible to say for certain, but I would say the same to worse.

                  BTW, don’t quote me on this but I’m pretty sure there’s nothing that you can add to WAR that would account for the league difference. One of the faults of WAR.

                • Matt Holliday had a bad start in Oakland and then was pretty good. That’s also an exceedingly small sample size, I don’t think you can use that as evidence.

                  I’m also not sure who/what you’re arguing with. Nobody here is saying Kemp is much better than Cano. Frankly, I think he’s more valuable right now, but I think it’s close. Do I have to say that Cano is better than Kemp for you to be satisfied?

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  Whatever about Holliday. Youmake a good point, the sample size was small, but there has been a definite discrepancy (if I’m using that word correctly) in the leagues for some time, and just going by the pitchers alone I don’t think it’s negligible.

                  Basically, I’m saying that Cano is a legitimate superstar player probably about on the level of Kemp, who is also a superstar.

                • Evan says:

                  The difference is between 0.25 to 0.5 wins: http://tinyurl.com/yeur72r

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  Thanks Evan.

                  0.25 to 0.5 wins is not negligible by any stretch of the imagination.

                • I never denied one league is better than the other. I also never called the difference between the AL and the NL negligible. I just don’t know that the difference in the leagues is significant enough that you can move Cano ahead of Kemp, based on past performance.

                  Give Cano the full benefit of the doubt in 2009 and add 0.5 to his WAR. He’s still just shy of Kemp’s number. And who knows if we should add the full 0.5, I’m just doing that for the sake of the argument.

                  In 2009, from all indications, playing in the AL did not make Robinson Cano a more valuable player than Matt Kemp.

                • And Kemp is still 2 years younger than Cano, with a better WAR, which, as shown, isn’t nullified by the fact that Kemp plays in the NL and Cano plays in the AL.

                  This isn’t a knock on Cano, Kemp just compares favorably at this point in their respective careers.

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  You also need to subtract 0.5 from Kemp.

                  Like I said, they’re about equal.

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  BTW, just want to say w/the whole debate above about how the bashing against a dissenting viewpoint can get out of hand that this has been a very civil discussion/semi debate. This is how these types of debates should go.

                • You know what, I’ll roll with that, I’ll stipulate for the sake of the conversation that Cano and Kemp had equal value in 2009.

                  Kemp is 2 years younger than Cano, and I think I showed above that talent at CF is probably a bit more scarce than talent at 2B. You’re starting a team from scratch. Who do you take?

                • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                  You’re right, because of age and position I’d probably take Kemp.

                  But a trade of one for the other is very, very close to an equal value trade.

                • Yeah me too. They’re both really really good, and its close, but, in that hypothetical, I think you have to go with Kemp.

                  I have to go get black-out drunk. Have fun, all.

                • Hey ZZ says:

                  With a gun to my head I would probably take Kemp. However, if I really sat down and thought about it, I may change my mind. Some things that would sway more towards Cano:

                  Kemp strikes out ALOT
                  Kemp has a pretty significant split. He destroys LHP but is pretty average in comparison against RHP.

                  Cano is a lefty in YS which clearly is an advantage
                  Cano as a lefty is just as good against LHP which is really valuable

                • One last comment… Leave your fandom aside here. If you really sat down and thought about it and tried to be objective, you’d take Kemp. What you’re saying is you’d sit down and think about only good things about Cano and only bad things about Kemp, you’re basically admitting to bias and admitting, furthermore, admitting to intentional bias.

                  If you weren’t a Yankees fan, you’d be choosing Kemp. You basically just admitted as much.

                  Ok I’m really out now. Have a good one guys.

                • Hey ZZ says:

                  Yeah I agree. I would take Kemp.

                  I was just saying if I really sat down and thought about it there are some things that would make that decision a little tough.

                • V says:

                  In a vacuum, I’d say ‘hells yeah’ to a Cano for Kemp trade. But the Yankees aren’t in a vacuum. They have Gardbrera (a passable short term solution) in CF, with Austin Jackson on the way.

                  What do they have for 2B if they dealt Cano for Kemp? Yeah. In a vacuum, Kemp > Cano, but for the Yankees, Cano > Kemp.

                • Ghost of Scott Brosius says:

                  Finding a center fielder who plays good defense, has speed, hits well and hits for power is extremely rare right now. The yankees, and brian cashman, would definitely take kemp if they could. there are a bunch of very good second baseman out there the yankees could get at some point, and some servicable ones they could get right now (scutaro, figgins, derosa). the yankees, with their resources, would take kemp, a more rare a commodity in baseball right now.

                • V says:

                  Totally disagree. (Gardbrera+Jackson)+Cano >> Kemp + overpaying a lesser 2B for a few years, then needing to find another 2B, then needing to find another 2B, etc. Cano’s the 2B for another 5-8 years, as long as he doesn’t collapse. It’s nice to have that position locked down.

                • Ghost of Scott Brosius says:

                  Why can’t we sign one second baseman and let him play there for 5 years? whats wrong with orlando hudson for 3? and kemp as your center fielder for ten years? we have to stop kidding ourselves-gardbrerra ain’t that great, and you have no idea what you’re going to get from ajax, no idea at all. i’d sleep easier knowing we were set for a decade in center

                • V says:

                  Orlando Hudson, really?

                  You do realize he’s almost 32, right? And most definitely NOT on the improving end of his career.

                  You take your .283/.357/.417 2B with Kemp, I’ll take Cano and Gardbrera/Jackson (who will be CHEAPER and most likely BETTER than Orlando Hudson).

            • Hey ZZ says:

              What I am basically saying is that the consensus is that Matt Kemp is a superstar.

              If that is the case Robinson Cano is a superstar as well. If you were to trade them straight up it is pretty much a wash.

              • Consensus? I disagree. I’ve never heard Kemp described as a superstar or as one of the best players in baseball. He’s usually not even described as the best player on his own team, even if he actually is. He’s described as a very good young player, which he is.

            • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

              Kemp plays in the NL. That is a very big factor that can’t be ignored. Cano has a very close WAR in a tougher league.

    • Accent Shallow says:

      1. Of course we are over-valuing Cano, we’re fans of a team that just won the World Series. Hopefully Cashman is more objective than we are about the general worth of the Yankees’ players (and I’m sure he is, or he’d have been fired long ago).

      2. The Swisher trade was absolute highwayfuckingrobbery, and I’m not sure anyone would argue otherwise. Sure, he was coming off a down season, but it was under odd circumstances, and Betemit seems to have spent years taking steps backward. Marquez is less than fungible, and while I’d rather have Nunez than Mini-Tex, the difference isn’t huge, and Nunez was due a 40-man spot that Mini-Tex wasn’t.

      3. If anyone out there is willing to overpay for Robbie, you have to explore it, but realistically, what could they get back that’s worth more than an under-30 up the middle player? And who plays 2B if Robbie is gone? I wouldn’t be particularly willing to trade him for prospects, so that means MLB-ready position players, and I can’t see anyone giving up something of equal to or greater value to Robbie.

      • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

        I disagree; I think Cano is generally undervalued.

        He is one of the best second basemen in baseball. He is certainly better than the Hobbit (Pedroia, of course), and yet fans continually want to trade him for “a better player”.

        While of course I’d love to trade him for a better player, I’d love to trade ANY player on the Yankees for a better player. But nobody says, “Tex is young, if it’s possible to get him in a trade for a better 1b or CF would you do it?” We’d answer that we wouldn’t have to because Tex is great for us now, and is a great value. But w/Robbie, he just put together a fantastic season for somebody his age yet people look only at his flaws (and there aren’t many) then decide that he’s good trade bait.

        We’re not trading him. We have superstar caliber offense at a position where not many teams too, and the Yanks would be fools to give that up unless they got someone for much better value…which can be said for every player on the team, not just Cano.

        • Pedroia’s WAR the last 2 seasons are higher than any single season WAR of Cano’s career. Pedroia’s a really good defender, and he’s a good hitter. They’re both good, don’t sell Pedroia short just because we like Cano and don’t like Pedroia.

          • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

            Pedroia has not been around as long; yes he had a fantastiic season in 08′, but Cano’s in 09′ was arguably better, and Pedroia is helped a lot by Fenway Park. He hits way, way better in the Sardine Can.

          • Hey ZZ says:

            When comparing Pedroia and Cano it really depends on how much you value defense.

            Pedroia is significantly better on defense than Cano but Cano is significantly better than Pedroia on offense.

            I personally would take the offense over the defense.

          • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

            Not to metion, the point of this post was not to undervalue Pedroia anyway (that was kind of a side effect). The point I was making is that Cano is really good to great. Would I trade him for a better player? Absolutely. Would I trade A-Rod for a better player? Absolutely. Ditto w/Tex, CC, Swishy, Posada…but nobody talks about trading them only for “players of higher value”. Why? Because it would be unnecessary. It’s so obvious it doesn’t need to be said, and we don’t have needs at those positions. It’s the same with Cano. I always considered Cano part of the Yanks’ core players.

  5. Bryan says:

    Lol. I should put that right next to the Nike poster I just ordered.

  6. Johnnyboy says:

    The pic is great but they should have made it seem more legit by adding the Nike logo under “BITCH”. Unless they’d get in trouble with the copyright and trademark stuff.

  7. “(combined record: 7-28)”

    And people wonder why I’m a Devils fan…sheesh

    • Oh come now, don’t make Devils fans look bad by attributing your fandom to being a winner-picker.

      • Okay, point. I’m a Devils fan because I think red and black are way cooler team colors than red, white and blue or orange and blue.

        and because Lou Lamoriello is the best executive in sports.

        And because Langenbrunner did a thing at my dad’s store during the lockout and my brother got to meet a professional hockey player (he’s as big a Devils fan as I am a Yankees fan)

        • Are you from Jersey?

          I became a Devils fan because we shared season tickets with a couple of my dad’s friends when I was a little kid, I’m not from Jersey or anything. I was actually at the playoff games in ’88, the first time they made the playoffs and beat the Isles and Caps before losing to the Bruins. It was awesome, total underdog story. My friend and I were actually on the post-game show after one of the Isles games at Brendan Byrne because we were kids standing on our seats and pointing at Kelly Hrudey over the glass while the whole arena did the taunting “Hrudey, Hrudey” chant after the Devils scored. Good times.

          You should go to the game on St. Patrick’s Day, they’re going to wear the old red, green and white jerseys. I may have to dust-off my old-style John MacLean jersey for the occasion.

          • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

            I am a Devils fan because my parents were.

            I simply can’t imagine being a fan of another team. “Choosing” a team doesn’t really happen in my family; it’s like being born the citizen of a natiom. Sitching teams is VERY rare and a huge deal.

            Devils rock this year, though. I’ve been following them on the internet.

            • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

              *nation*

            • This year has certainly been fun so far. I’m surprised by how well Clarkson and Bergfors are playing. Those draft picks are really paying off for the Devils huh? Parise, Zajac and Bergfors, first round picks in consecutive years, all starring for the team. And Corrente (the next first-round pick in the line) is on his way, he should be up with the Devils for good in a year or two.

              Lamoriello really is amazing, I shudder to think what’s going to happen after he leaves the organization.

              • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

                I’ll be honest; while I was never going to be anything but a Devils fan, I didn’t start watching them until last year because the Yanks weren’t in the playoffs.

                BTW, it’s an absolute travesty that that Devils-’Canes series isn’t considered one of the greatest of all time. 2 games decided at the buzzer, 2 in OT, a 1-0 win, and a 7 game series. The fact that nobody ranks it up there with other great series is insulting and a testament to the power of the big market.

  8. Riddering says:

    What an iconic pose of Papelbon. I love it.

  9. Thomas says:

    Let’s go UConn!!!

    • Woo.

      I’m a little disappointed by a relatively low margin-of-victory over W&M, but I was out and didn’t see the game. Anyway, I hope Dyson can keep up the hot scoring all season. He and Walker could be one of the best one/two guard combinations in the country.

  10. Andrew says:

    i just put this on facebook and my friend is whining that it is immature and shows that yankee fans are assholes. hes like “take it down or ill take you down”

    good ole sox fans.

    • He sounds like a real delicate flower. Good grief.

    • JMK aka The Overshare says:

      “I’ll take you down”? Hahaha, what a riot! If a Sox fan put up a similar jokey picture of the Yanks, I might take a playful shot, but I wouldn’t make a childish-sounding threat on a facebook. Funny, though.

      • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) who is now a Boston fan says:

        You know what, you RAB punks? I’m calling you out.

        Either take this poster down or I unleash a terror onto the world the likes of which have never been seen before.

        And you know I’m serious. You know why? Because Boston fans never, ever make hollow threats. Ever.

        You’ve been worned. You have thirty seconds. Go.

  11. JMK aka The Overshare says:

    OK, here’s a hypothetical: Next year’s draft sees Bryce Harper fall to us as the last pick of the 1st round. He demands $15 million.

    Do you sign him?

    • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

      Yeah.

      Not this would ever happen unless he gets totally, horribly, and gruesomely injured.

      • JMK aka The Overshare says:

        Why is that so set in stone? You think someone else would sign him earlier for that money or the Sox would pick him just to block us?

        • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

          Yes to both.

          I think one of those two would almost certainly happen for a pure talent of his caliber.

          Of course, I know nothing about the draft, so everthing I say should not be taken w/a grain of salt. More like a mountain of salt.

          But, yeah.

  12. larryf says:

    Some questions:

    1) did matsui slide at all this year?

    2) did J Ro really steal 2nd down 7-3 in game 6?

    3) anything new on wetteland since yesterday’s piece?

  13. Hey ZZ says:

    I asked something that kind of got lost in the shuffle in the big Cano debate up top, but am really curious about it.

    Why does WAR give SO much value to defense? I understand defense is valuable, but I would think that relatively offense is more valuable than defense.

    For example, I find it hard to believe Franklin Guttierez with a 5.9 WAR and his 103 OPS+ is almost a win more valuable then Matt Kemp at a 5.0 WAR.

    • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

      It’s a weird thing. Studies show that offense is far more valuable than defense. I have a Sports Illustrated article in my house that used UZR to prove it.

      Yeah, that is a bit puzzling.

      • I’m really no expert on this stuff, but isn’t the explanation just that WAR measures runs above average, both on offense and defense, so it’s not really valuing one over the other as much as it is aggregating the value added in each of those facets of the game (as well as other facets like park factors, etc.)? If a guy adds 5 runs on offense and 5 runs on defense, do you not think that player should be considered to have been worth 10 runs to his team? Should the 5 runs on offense be more valuable than the 5 runs on defense?

        Again, though, I’m really not an expert at how this metric is calculated. It would be cool if someone with more knowledge/experience could help out.

    • Tank Foster says:

      Don’t know if this makes sense, but UZR units are runs, and a typical number for the best SS in the league would be +15-20, and the worst would be -15-20. The positive/negative refer to difference from league average. Let’s say that a replacement level SS would be slightly below average, say -8.

      This would mean that if you had the BEST shortstop in the league, he would account for – by virtue of defense alone – 25 runs for your team, or about 5 games worth of offense. If you have an average SS, you save about 1-2 games worth of offense per year over a replacement player.

      For offense, runs created for AL SSs ranged from 122 (Jeter) to 37 (Betancourt) among guys who played close to a full season. The average was 77. If a replacement player is, say 40 (possibly it’s worse, but I’ll go with Betancourt’s numbers to err on the side against offense), the BEST shortstop in the league accounts for 80 runs better than replacement, or about 16 games worth of offense. An average guy, compared to replacement level, is 37 runs, or about 7 games worth of offense.

      Summarizing:

      Value of average defense v. replacement level defense: 1-2 games worth of offense.
      Value of best defense v. replacement level defense: 5 games worth of offense.

      Value of average offense v. replacement level offense: 7 games worth of offense.
      Value of best offense v. replacement level offense: 16 games worth of offense.

      Defense is worth probably a bit more than I would have guessed, but it is not even close to the importance of offense. If you were to choose the league’s best defensive SS, and could get average defense out of him, you would have a player that was about 9 games worth of offense BETTER than a replacement player.

      On the other hand, if you had the league’s worst defensive SS, but got league BEST offense from him, you would have a player that is about 14 games worth of offense BETTER than a replacement player.

      When you consider that Jeter was the best in MLB among SS for runs created, and his UZR saved the Yankees 8 runs above replacement, there is absolutely no doubt he should remain the Yankees SS as long as his legs will carry him.

      I’m guessing if you looked at the Yankees position by position and did this kind of analysis, you’d find that Jeter outperformed his counterparts on other teams by more than any other player on the team.

      You can make an argument from these data that Jeter should be the MVP. Best offensive SS in baseball, above average defense, team leader, on the WS winner.

  14. Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

    When your one-pitch, arrogant closer blows the season at home…”

    To be fair, our closer only has one pitch. It’s just one epic, amazing, sensational, utterly brilliant pitch. Papelbon just has a pitch.

    • pete says:

      paps actually has 3, technically, and uses 2

    • Tank Foster says:

      Mo having “one pitch” is a stretch. He does have a 4 seam fastball he uses with the cutter, and according to hitters, he varies the spin on his cutter alot–sinks it sometimes, etc. He might be the most one-pitch-ish pitcher out there, but he’s not truly one pitch. He was in his prime, not now though.

  15. Marcus says:

    Funny:

    http://www.theonion.com/conten.....ed_yankees

    “Cashman said “Yankees suck” was a year-round moneymaker for the organization, providing an endless revenue stream that stems not only from chants during the regular season and playoffs, but also from offhanded remarks made during casual conversations among friends, and from people yelling the phrase at public events that have nothing to do with the Yankees.”

  16. Rafael says:

    awesome, but i have to say that Dropkick Murphys,musicaly speaking, is way better than Jay-Z

  17. Pete C says:

    That is awesome, I almost can’t wait till Monday to put it on the wall at work, almost. And yes the drop kick murphy’s are better than Jay-Z, and I for one do hate rap, mostly because it’s beneath me.

  18. slappy white says:

    Thank you so much for that pic, it is definately gonna find its way to a few desks at work on Monday

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.