Jump to content

mavscougars

Polanco a Tiger again?? I'd love to see it

Recommended Posts

Just because people point out that Raburn had a better year than Delmon Young does not mean they think he had a good year.

lol, ok,...

Delmon Young? where did that come from?

:silly:

I'm talkin' about Raburn vs. Polanco (-ish).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think Polanco must have banged someones mom or stole someones car to get the vitriol he gets from the loudest on here.

Because there can't possibly be a logical reason for people not wanting Polanco back. Like the fact he's old and isn't good anymore.

Nope, he banged our moms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I still think Polanco must have banged someones mom or stole someones car to get the vitriol he gets from the loudest on here.

Claiming he's on the downside of his career and just isn't very good at baseball is not vitriol. No one is calling him an *******. No one is saying he isn't a classy guy. People are stating facts backed up by statistics.

Why are you taking this so personally?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claiming he's on the downside of his career and just isn't very good at baseball is not vitriol. No one is calling him an *******. No one is saying he isn't a classy guy. People are stating facts backed up by statistics.

Why are you taking this so personally?

The same reason it seems like people are taking it personaly from the opposite view. He was called 'garbage'....garbage?

There is still the Sizemore angle all over this. Did you read all my replies? I don't want him on the team either...if we have other options...we are saying basically the same thing.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure, why not? It isn't as if Polanco's OPS the past 4 years has been impressive.

Polanco has never been an impressive OPS guy, so not sure why we'd expect him to be that in the twilight of his career.

I'm not a huge proponent of signing Polanco, but if we miss out on some other players first, I wouldn't mind signing him to compete at 2B/3B and provide roster depth.

He still looks like a plus defender at two positions, to me. And it looks as if he can bat .275-.300 with an OBP of .330+, which coupled with the defense, isn't terrible. I mean, the last three years he's been a 3 WAR player. That's pretty decent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Polanco has never been an impressive OPS guy, so not sure why we'd expect him to be that in the twilight of his career.

I'm not a huge proponent of signing Polanco, but if we miss out on some other players first, I wouldn't mind signing him to compete at 2B/3B and provide roster depth.

He still looks like a plus defender at two positions, to me. And it looks as if he can bat .275-.300 with an OBP of .330+, which coupled with the defense, isn't terrible. I mean, the last three years he's been a 3 WAR player. That's pretty decent.

Seems pretty logical to me...

Don't let stats get in the way of a good rant! :happy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Polanco will be 36 last year, was not any good despite playing in a very good hitters park, and has not played 2nd base since he left Detroit. I'm not sure what about him is supposed to be interesting really, other than that he played for the Tigers and was also not very good his last season with them.

He played some 2B in 2010.

He also was a 3.3 WAR player for Detroit in 2009, so I'm not sure where the "not very good" bit is coming from. He was not, and is not, a great player. But he's not been bad by any means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem is, the Tigers just can't "sign him for depth". He's under contract, and making over 6million per year. Do we really want to see the Tigers give up anything at all for a guy who "might" get on base at a .335 clip?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Problem is, the Tigers just can't "sign him for depth". He's under contract, and making over 6million per year. Do we really want to see the Tigers give up anything at all for a guy who "might" get on base at a .335 clip?

My mistake, I thought he was a free agent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The evolution of an off-season thread:

1. OP professes desire to add players, overstating his value in the process.

2. 4-5 posts responding they don't want the player. 2-3 have stats to support their position. 1-2 have some snark.

3. Thread originator poses a rhetorical question that further overstates value of player.

4. Stop hatin' the player.

5. *Poster's Choice*: Strawman argument or strained analogy.

6. General squabbling. Both sides have a poster or two overstate their respective position some.

7. Detailed post claiming player isn't *completely* worthless - but probably isn't worth getting.

8. 5 to 6 posts stating the same as above.

9. Stop hatin' the player!

10. Minor squabbles about semantics or hypotheticals that really do not address the OP.

11. Suggest haters have some physcological need to discredit player due to pettiness or hang-up to discredit their position. Bonus points if most extreme position is cited as the commonly held position of the opposition.

12. Somebody brings up Brandon Inge -> return to 1.

Edited by Mr. Bigglesworth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The evolution of an off-season thread:

1. OP professes desire to add players, overstating his value in the process.

2. 4-5 posts responding they don't want the player. 2-3 have stats to support their position. 1-2 have some snark.

3. Thread originator poses a rhetorical question that further overstates value of player.

4. Stop hatin' the player.

5. *Poster's Choice*: Strawman argument or strained analogy.

6. General squabbling. Both sides have a poster or two overstate their respective position some.

7. Detailed post claiming player isn't *completely* worthless - but probably isn't worth getting.

8. 5 to 6 posts stating the same as above.

9. Stop hatin' the player!

10. Minor squabbles about semantics or hypotheticals that really do not address the OP.

11. Suggest haters have some physcological need to discredit player due to pettiness or hang-up to discredit their position. Bonus points if most extreme position is cited as the commonly held position of the opposition.

12. Somebody brings up Brandon Inge -> return to 1.

Haha. This is spot on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The same reason it seems like people are taking it personaly from the opposite view. He was called 'garbage'....garbage?

And somehow this becomes "Polanco must of screwed your moms"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The evolution of an off-season thread:

1. OP professes desire to add players, overstating his value in the process.

2. 4-5 posts responding they don't want the player. 2-3 have stats to support their position. 1-2 have some snark.

3. Thread originator poses a rhetorical question that further overstates value of player.

4. Stop hatin' the player.

5. *Poster's Choice*: Strawman argument or strained analogy.

6. General squabbling. Both sides have a poster or two overstate their respective position some.

7. Detailed post claiming player isn't *completely* worthless - but probably isn't worth getting.

8. 5 to 6 posts stating the same as above.

9. Stop hatin' the player!

10. Minor squabbles about semantics or hypotheticals that really do not address the OP.

11. Suggest haters have some physcological need to discredit player due to pettiness or hang-up to discredit their position. Bonus points if most extreme position is cited as the commonly held position of the opposition.

12. Somebody brings up Brandon Inge -> return to 1.

I see myself in several of these. Oops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And somehow this becomes "Polanco must of screwed your moms"?
To be fair, at least he got it right: "must have"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He played some 2B in 2010.

He also was a 3.3 WAR player for Detroit in 2009, so I'm not sure where the "not very good" bit is coming from. He was not, and is not, a great player. But he's not been bad by any means.

That is because WAR gives him a ton of value for his supposedly great 2nd base defense, he was a below average bat in 2009 and has continued to be so (in fact getting worse) since

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Polanco has never been as great as his admirers suggest. I used to like him, but found myself criticizing him a lot because he was so overrated.

+1

Especially in the immediate aftermath of the lovefest that followed the Tigers (smart) decision not to re-sign him. The only *great* season he had as a Tiger was 2007. Well, and the partial season 2005. He was an outstanding defensive player during his entire time in Detroit, except ironically in his final game as a Tiger in which he chose a great time to have the worst defensive game of his 4 1/2 years. Therefore he had value during his entire tenure, but he was a bad offensive player in 2006 and 2009, and he was so-so in 2008.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The evolution of an off-season thread:

1. OP professes desire to add players, overstating his value in the process.

2. 4-5 posts responding they don't want the player. 2-3 have stats to support their position. 1-2 have some snark.

3. Thread originator poses a rhetorical question that further overstates value of player.

4. Stop hatin' the player.

5. *Poster's Choice*: Strawman argument or strained analogy.

6. General squabbling. Both sides have a poster or two overstate their respective position some.

7. Detailed post claiming player isn't *completely* worthless - but probably isn't worth getting.

8. 5 to 6 posts stating the same as above.

9. Stop hatin' the player!

10. Minor squabbles about semantics or hypotheticals that really do not address the OP.

11. Suggest haters have some physcological need to discredit player due to pettiness or hang-up to discredit their position. Bonus points if most extreme position is cited as the commonly held position of the opposition.

12. Somebody brings up Brandon Inge -> return to 1.

I think this is actually quite profound!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is because WAR gives him a ton of value for his supposedly great 2nd base defense, he was a below average bat in 2009 and has continued to be so (in fact getting worse) since

Correct. WAR loves MIF. If you play average D and hit for even a .700 OPS, you'll be a 3 win player according to war. See Barmes, Clint. I mean seriously, Jason Bartlett had a .615 OPS at short and was a 1.8 WAR player, and Brendan Ryan had a .640 OPS and was a 2.6 WAR player. Sean Rodriguez had a .680 OPS and was worth 2.3 WAR, and so on. Basically, if you're an every day player at short or second, you're going to accumulate ~2 WAR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The evolution of an off-season thread:

1. OP professes desire to add players, overstating his value in the process.

2. 4-5 posts responding they don't want the player. 2-3 have stats to support their position. 1-2 have some snark.

3. Thread originator poses a rhetorical question that further overstates value of player.

4. Stop hatin' the player.

5. *Poster's Choice*: Strawman argument or strained analogy.

6. General squabbling. Both sides have a poster or two overstate their respective position some.

7. Detailed post claiming player isn't *completely* worthless - but probably isn't worth getting.

8. 5 to 6 posts stating the same as above.

9. Stop hatin' the player!

10. Minor squabbles about semantics or hypotheticals that really do not address the OP.

11. Suggest haters have some physcological need to discredit player due to pettiness or hang-up to discredit their position. Bonus points if most extreme position is cited as the commonly held position of the opposition.

12. Somebody brings up Brandon Inge -> return to 1.

Looks like I covered #7!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They should move Inge to center field and trade Jackson for Polanco.

Great, then Inge would have to lead off....how about a retread lineup (in honor of Blueadams):

CF - Inge

2B - Polanco

RF - Maggs (aw hell, just one more shot)

1B - Miggy

DH - VMart

LF - Thames (1 Hr/13 at-bats, baby!)

3B - Guillen (could he be worse than Inge was?)

SS - Peralta

C - Avila

Running the bases would sound like a drive-by shooting....pop! pop! pop!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Correct. WAR loves MIF .... Basically, if you're an every day player at short or second, you're going to accumulate ~2 WAR.

A parallel to this observation is that if you are an everyday player and hit somewhere in the middle of the line-up, you will rack up at least 80 RBI in something approaching a normal or typical run scoring environment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Motown Sports Blog



  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      96,816
    • Total Posts
      3,021,172
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...