A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hetchinspete's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Roy, 

    What I find amazing is that I've asked Chuck for an explanation of his point of view twice now and have yet to receive a reply. So either Chuck has no basis for his argument or he doesn't care to reply. Either way here it goes for a third time to Chuck if he cares to reply.

    Chuck, 

    If you define a pitcher, starter as well as reliever as a part time player and it seems you believe they can make the HOF, why cannot a DH, a definitive position as of I believe 1970, which again by your definition is also a part time player why cannot a DH make the HOF. I'd love to hear a clear and concise explanation, please.

    Hetch 

     

    [/QUOTE]Not speaking for Chuck..... But I will give you my read on the D H & the HOF.......  The only one we are talking about to date is our own "BIG PAPI".... That said, his #'s are good(pretty/very good) and he has been a force on 3 RED SOX W S champs (been a Sox since 2003-2013+) and that is what our hearts & minds will remember.....  Add to it, his longevity in a SOX unie and we are all counting the 5 years after he retires to "walk thru the door" of the HALL..... Fast forward to today, and I think that we are hard pressed to throw any other names into this conversation.  Add again, the movement by management away from a 1 full time player (@big $$$$) for that position...... John Farrell, if the truth be told, would use 2 to 3 players at that spot if & when Papi retires........  Thats how I see it, & I stand by it !!!


    [/QUOTE]

    there is no way of knowing this as it is a product of availability. teams that currently use multiple DHs are doing so because they either don't have a big bopper without a position to play or one in the minors being blocked. The sox on the other hand are in a different situation entirely. if papi retired today, we have a couple full time DH options available to us and even more (middlebrooks) if we signed Drew. Although none who would be as productive as papi (goes without saying)

     

    as for your assertation that paying "BIG $$$$$$$$" to a single full time DH is bad business refer to the last post on the previous page. the DH GOAT is only making 15M per year. That is a steal for one of the best hitters in the league over the past 3+ seasons. If he was a 1Bman (which is entirely in the realm of possibility) he would be making anywhere from 20-25M per year.

     

    yeah, when papi retires they might platoon @DH but that doesn't mean FT DHs are dead. lots of positions are platooned but that doesn't mean full time players at that position no longer exist. the sox currently platoon LF but that doesn't mean they will never have another FT LF'er again.... it's just a product of availability.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from crazyworldoftroybrown. Show crazyworldoftroybrown's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    Tony Oliva not in HOF, forget it. Bad knees, played RF.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to Hetchinspete's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Roy, 

    What I find amazing is that I've asked Chuck for an explanation of his point of view twice now and have yet to receive a reply. So either Chuck has no basis for his argument or he doesn't care to reply. Either way here it goes for a third time to Chuck if he cares to reply.

    Chuck, 

    If you define a pitcher, starter as well as reliever as a part time player and it seems you believe they can make the HOF, why cannot a DH, a definitive position as of I believe 1970, which again by your definition is also a part time player why cannot a DH make the HOF. I'd love to hear a clear and concise explanation, please.

    Hetch 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, that part-time comment or being an incomplete player got me. I'll leave starting pitchers in A.L. out of it, although starters in general aren't the same workhorses they used to be in the days of four-man rotations and 38 to 40 starts a year, rather than 30 to 33.

    But closers. Even the best closers are usually incomplete players. They're relievers because they couldn't hack it as a starter because they usually have just one, maybe two effective pitches. Starters typically need more than that. Then beyond that, we're talking about players who play typically 60 to 80 innings a year. Can't get more parttime than that. 

    So if someone is going to hold being a DH against Ortiz, then they certainly shouldn't want closers in the Hall. That's even more part-time and incomplete of a player.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from HailToTheKing. Show HailToTheKing's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    Here's a question:  How many here think that Adam Vinatieri should eventually be in the pro football HOF?  Or for that matter what about Ray Guy?  Just wondering.......

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to mef429's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hetchinspete's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Roy, 

    What I find amazing is that I've asked Chuck for an explanation of his point of view twice now and have yet to receive a reply. So either Chuck has no basis for his argument or he doesn't care to reply. Either way here it goes for a third time to Chuck if he cares to reply.

    Chuck, 

    If you define a pitcher, starter as well as reliever as a part time player and it seems you believe they can make the HOF, why cannot a DH, a definitive position as of I believe 1970, which again by your definition is also a part time player why cannot a DH make the HOF. I'd love to hear a clear and concise explanation, please.

    Hetch 

     

    [/QUOTE]Not speaking for Chuck..... But I will give you my read on the D H & the HOF.......  The only one we are talking about to date is our own "BIG PAPI".... That said, his #'s are good(pretty/very good) and he has been a force on 3 RED SOX W S champs (been a Sox since 2003-2013+) and that is what our hearts & minds will remember.....  Add to it, his longevity in a SOX unie and we are all counting the 5 years after he retires to "walk thru the door" of the HALL..... Fast forward to today, and I think that we are hard pressed to throw any other names into this conversation.  Add again, the movement by management away from a 1 full time player (@big $$$$) for that position...... John Farrell, if the truth be told, would use 2 to 3 players at that spot if & when Papi retires........  Thats how I see it, & I stand by it !!!


    [/QUOTE]

    there is no way of knowing this as it is a product of availability. teams that currently use multiple DHs are doing so because they either don't have a big bopper without a position to play or one in the minors being blocked. The sox on the other hand are in a different situation entirely. if papi retired today, we have a couple full time DH options available to us and even more (middlebrooks) if we signed Drew. Although none who would be as productive as papi (goes without saying)

     

    as for your assertation that paying "BIG $$$$$$$$" to a single full time DH is bad business refer to the last post on the previous page. the DH GOAT is only making 15M per year. That is a steal for one of the best hitters in the league over the past 3+ seasons. If he was a 1Bman (which is entirely in the realm of possibility) he would be making anywhere from 20-25M per year.

     

    yeah, when papi retires they might platoon @DH but that doesn't mean FT DHs are dead. lots of positions are platooned but that doesn't mean full time players at that position no longer exist. the sox currently platoon LF but that doesn't mean they will never have another FT LF'er again.... it's just a product of availability.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    To add to your point. It's laughable when someone claims that managers would rather use two or three players as DH to give them "flexibility" in the lineup rather than a bat like Ortiz's. You're right -- it's about availability.

    If Ortiz was 30 after the end of last season and hit the free agent market, there would be plenty of teams lining up to sign him. Managers aren't idiots. They'd rather have a guy with a .950-plus OPS hitting 30-plus home runs -- a middle of the order bat -- rather than a bunch of scrubs.

    Let's say Ortiz was gone. Bill can't be that stupid and think that the Farrell would rather platoon Carp-Nava-Gomes in at DH and LF, rather than sticking with Ortiz at DH and platooning the other guys in LF.

    That there aren't more full-time DHs is because there aren't a lot of guys out there like Ortiz. If managers would rather platoon a bunch of guys at that position, why has Kansas City's Bobby Butler played so many games at DH the last three years.

    After playing mostly 1B (145 and 127 games) his first two full seasons in the majors, his last three years have been:

    Age 25: DH-142 G, 1B-11 G.
    Age 26: DH-138 G, 1B-20 G.
    Age 27: DH-150 G, 1B-7 G.

    So he seems to becoming a career DH.

    That the DH is used by multiple players on many teams has more to do with simply not having enough good players or having to move guys around because of injury, rather than simply not wanting a big bat like Ortiz (or Butler or Martinez in Detroit) from holding the job full time.

     

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kingface12. Show Kingface12's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mef429's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hetchinspete's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Roy, 

    What I find amazing is that I've asked Chuck for an explanation of his point of view twice now and have yet to receive a reply. So either Chuck has no basis for his argument or he doesn't care to reply. Either way here it goes for a third time to Chuck if he cares to reply.

    Chuck, 

    If you define a pitcher, starter as well as reliever as a part time player and it seems you believe they can make the HOF, why cannot a DH, a definitive position as of I believe 1970, which again by your definition is also a part time player why cannot a DH make the HOF. I'd love to hear a clear and concise explanation, please.

    Hetch 

     

    [/QUOTE]Not speaking for Chuck..... But I will give you my read on the D H & the HOF.......  The only one we are talking about to date is our own "BIG PAPI".... That said, his #'s are good(pretty/very good) and he has been a force on 3 RED SOX W S champs (been a Sox since 2003-2013+) and that is what our hearts & minds will remember.....  Add to it, his longevity in a SOX unie and we are all counting the 5 years after he retires to "walk thru the door" of the HALL..... Fast forward to today, and I think that we are hard pressed to throw any other names into this conversation.  Add again, the movement by management away from a 1 full time player (@big $$$$) for that position...... John Farrell, if the truth be told, would use 2 to 3 players at that spot if & when Papi retires........  Thats how I see it, & I stand by it !!!


    [/QUOTE]

    there is no way of knowing this as it is a product of availability. teams that currently use multiple DHs are doing so because they either don't have a big bopper without a position to play or one in the minors being blocked. The sox on the other hand are in a different situation entirely. if papi retired today, we have a couple full time DH options available to us and even more (middlebrooks) if we signed Drew. Although none who would be as productive as papi (goes without saying)

     

    as for your assertation that paying "BIG $$$$$$$$" to a single full time DH is bad business refer to the last post on the previous page. the DH GOAT is only making 15M per year. That is a steal for one of the best hitters in the league over the past 3+ seasons. If he was a 1Bman (which is entirely in the realm of possibility) he would be making anywhere from 20-25M per year.

     

    yeah, when papi retires they might platoon @DH but that doesn't mean FT DHs are dead. lots of positions are platooned but that doesn't mean full time players at that position no longer exist. the sox currently platoon LF but that doesn't mean they will never have another FT LF'er again.... it's just a product of availability.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    To add to your point. It's laughable when someone claims that managers would rather use two or three players as DH to give them "flexibility" in the lineup rather than a bat like Ortiz's. You're right -- it's about availability.

    If Ortiz was 30 after the end of last season and hit the free agent market, there would be plenty of teams lining up to sign him. Managers aren't idiots. They'd rather have a guy with a .950-plus OPS hitting 30-plus home runs -- a middle of the order bat -- rather than a bunch of scrubs.

    Let's say Ortiz was gone. Bill can't be that stupid and think that the Farrell would rather platoon Carp-Nava-Gomes in at DH and LF, rather than sticking with Ortiz at DH and platooning the other guys in LF.

    That there aren't more full-time DHs is because there aren't a lot of guys out there like Ortiz. If managers would rather platoon a bunch of guys at that position, why has Kansas City's Bobby Butler played so many games at DH the last three years.

    After playing mostly 1B (145 and 127 games) his first two full seasons in the majors, his last three years have been:

    Age 25: DH-142 G, 1B-11 G.
    Age 26: DH-138 G, 1B-20 G.
    Age 27: DH-150 G, 1B-7 G.

    So he seems to becoming a career DH.

    That the DH is used by multiple players on many teams has more to do with simply not having enough good players or having to move guys around because of injury, rather than simply not wanting a big bat like Ortiz (or Butler or Martinez in Detroit) from holding the job full time.

     

    [/QUOTE] OK,OK,OK.....  B-806 may be stupid & John Farrel enjoyed a great playoff/W S , but if PAPI retired today Ben C . would not have a problem trotting out Carp, Gomes , & Nava and put the rest of the $$$$$ in the Bank !!!


    [/QUOTE]

    That could be true.....so what?  What does that have to do with David Ortiz making or not making the hall of fame??

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mef429's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hetchinspete's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Roy, 

    What I find amazing is that I've asked Chuck for an explanation of his point of view twice now and have yet to receive a reply. So either Chuck has no basis for his argument or he doesn't care to reply. Either way here it goes for a third time to Chuck if he cares to reply.

    Chuck, 

    If you define a pitcher, starter as well as reliever as a part time player and it seems you believe they can make the HOF, why cannot a DH, a definitive position as of I believe 1970, which again by your definition is also a part time player why cannot a DH make the HOF. I'd love to hear a clear and concise explanation, please.

    Hetch 

     

    [/QUOTE]Not speaking for Chuck..... But I will give you my read on the D H & the HOF.......  The only one we are talking about to date is our own "BIG PAPI".... That said, his #'s are good(pretty/very good) and he has been a force on 3 RED SOX W S champs (been a Sox since 2003-2013+) and that is what our hearts & minds will remember.....  Add to it, his longevity in a SOX unie and we are all counting the 5 years after he retires to "walk thru the door" of the HALL..... Fast forward to today, and I think that we are hard pressed to throw any other names into this conversation.  Add again, the movement by management away from a 1 full time player (@big $$$$) for that position...... John Farrell, if the truth be told, would use 2 to 3 players at that spot if & when Papi retires........  Thats how I see it, & I stand by it !!!


    [/QUOTE]

    there is no way of knowing this as it is a product of availability. teams that currently use multiple DHs are doing so because they either don't have a big bopper without a position to play or one in the minors being blocked. The sox on the other hand are in a different situation entirely. if papi retired today, we have a couple full time DH options available to us and even more (middlebrooks) if we signed Drew. Although none who would be as productive as papi (goes without saying)

     

    as for your assertation that paying "BIG $$$$$$$$" to a single full time DH is bad business refer to the last post on the previous page. the DH GOAT is only making 15M per year. That is a steal for one of the best hitters in the league over the past 3+ seasons. If he was a 1Bman (which is entirely in the realm of possibility) he would be making anywhere from 20-25M per year.

     

    yeah, when papi retires they might platoon @DH but that doesn't mean FT DHs are dead. lots of positions are platooned but that doesn't mean full time players at that position no longer exist. the sox currently platoon LF but that doesn't mean they will never have another FT LF'er again.... it's just a product of availability.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    To add to your point. It's laughable when someone claims that managers would rather use two or three players as DH to give them "flexibility" in the lineup rather than a bat like Ortiz's. You're right -- it's about availability.

    If Ortiz was 30 after the end of last season and hit the free agent market, there would be plenty of teams lining up to sign him. Managers aren't idiots. They'd rather have a guy with a .950-plus OPS hitting 30-plus home runs -- a middle of the order bat -- rather than a bunch of scrubs.

    Let's say Ortiz was gone. Bill can't be that stupid and think that the Farrell would rather platoon Carp-Nava-Gomes in at DH and LF, rather than sticking with Ortiz at DH and platooning the other guys in LF.

    That there aren't more full-time DHs is because there aren't a lot of guys out there like Ortiz. If managers would rather platoon a bunch of guys at that position, why has Kansas City's Bobby Butler played so many games at DH the last three years.

    After playing mostly 1B (145 and 127 games) his first two full seasons in the majors, his last three years have been:

    Age 25: DH-142 G, 1B-11 G.
    Age 26: DH-138 G, 1B-20 G.
    Age 27: DH-150 G, 1B-7 G.

    So he seems to becoming a career DH.

    That the DH is used by multiple players on many teams has more to do with simply not having enough good players or having to move guys around because of injury, rather than simply not wanting a big bat like Ortiz (or Butler or Martinez in Detroit) from holding the job full time.

     

    [/QUOTE] OK,OK,OK.....  B-806 may be stupid & John Farrel enjoyed a great playoff/W S , but if PAPI retired today Ben C . would not have a problem trotting out Carp, Gomes , & Nava and put the rest of the $$$$$ in the Bank !!!


    [/QUOTE]

    Haven't been paying attention to the way the Sox do business, have you. The Sox history with both Theo and Ben have been to continually try to upgrade the team, rather than simply bank the money. So I doubt very much that if Ortiz got hurt or retired today, that Ben would think, "Let's see -- we lost a .300 hitter who has a nearly 1,000 OPS with 30 plus homers and 100-plus RBIs, a guy opposing pitchers fear and will intentionally walk, and we now we'll rotate guys who'll like combine significantly less production at the position. Yup, I'm fine with that. I think I'll simply put my feet up and take a nap."

    If you believe that, you are truly delusional. Ben likely would go out and sign a Morales or try to pry a Butler from the Royals. You'd likely see that blockbusta deal you keep wanting. And that's especially true with the makeup of the team this year where Ortiz and Napoli are the only proven middle-of-the-order bats.

    The Sox traded Iggy because they want more offense at a defensive position. So you really think they'll settle for less offense at an OFFENSIVE position? I can feel my brain cells melting while trying to get my head around that.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mef429's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hetchinspete's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Roy, 

    What I find amazing is that I've asked Chuck for an explanation of his point of view twice now and have yet to receive a reply. So either Chuck has no basis for his argument or he doesn't care to reply. Either way here it goes for a third time to Chuck if he cares to reply.

    Chuck, 

    If you define a pitcher, starter as well as reliever as a part time player and it seems you believe they can make the HOF, why cannot a DH, a definitive position as of I believe 1970, which again by your definition is also a part time player why cannot a DH make the HOF. I'd love to hear a clear and concise explanation, please.

    Hetch 

     

    [/QUOTE]Not speaking for Chuck..... But I will give you my read on the D H & the HOF.......  The only one we are talking about to date is our own "BIG PAPI".... That said, his #'s are good(pretty/very good) and he has been a force on 3 RED SOX W S champs (been a Sox since 2003-2013+) and that is what our hearts & minds will remember.....  Add to it, his longevity in a SOX unie and we are all counting the 5 years after he retires to "walk thru the door" of the HALL..... Fast forward to today, and I think that we are hard pressed to throw any other names into this conversation.  Add again, the movement by management away from a 1 full time player (@big $$$$) for that position...... John Farrell, if the truth be told, would use 2 to 3 players at that spot if & when Papi retires........  Thats how I see it, & I stand by it !!!


    [/QUOTE]

    there is no way of knowing this as it is a product of availability. teams that currently use multiple DHs are doing so because they either don't have a big bopper without a position to play or one in the minors being blocked. The sox on the other hand are in a different situation entirely. if papi retired today, we have a couple full time DH options available to us and even more (middlebrooks) if we signed Drew. Although none who would be as productive as papi (goes without saying)

     

    as for your assertation that paying "BIG $$$$$$$$" to a single full time DH is bad business refer to the last post on the previous page. the DH GOAT is only making 15M per year. That is a steal for one of the best hitters in the league over the past 3+ seasons. If he was a 1Bman (which is entirely in the realm of possibility) he would be making anywhere from 20-25M per year.

     

    yeah, when papi retires they might platoon @DH but that doesn't mean FT DHs are dead. lots of positions are platooned but that doesn't mean full time players at that position no longer exist. the sox currently platoon LF but that doesn't mean they will never have another FT LF'er again.... it's just a product of availability.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    To add to your point. It's laughable when someone claims that managers would rather use two or three players as DH to give them "flexibility" in the lineup rather than a bat like Ortiz's. You're right -- it's about availability.

    If Ortiz was 30 after the end of last season and hit the free agent market, there would be plenty of teams lining up to sign him. Managers aren't idiots. They'd rather have a guy with a .950-plus OPS hitting 30-plus home runs -- a middle of the order bat -- rather than a bunch of scrubs.

    Let's say Ortiz was gone. Bill can't be that stupid and think that the Farrell would rather platoon Carp-Nava-Gomes in at DH and LF, rather than sticking with Ortiz at DH and platooning the other guys in LF.

    That there aren't more full-time DHs is because there aren't a lot of guys out there like Ortiz. If managers would rather platoon a bunch of guys at that position, why has Kansas City's Bobby Butler played so many games at DH the last three years.

    After playing mostly 1B (145 and 127 games) his first two full seasons in the majors, his last three years have been:

    Age 25: DH-142 G, 1B-11 G.
    Age 26: DH-138 G, 1B-20 G.
    Age 27: DH-150 G, 1B-7 G.

    So he seems to becoming a career DH.

    That the DH is used by multiple players on many teams has more to do with simply not having enough good players or having to move guys around because of injury, rather than simply not wanting a big bat like Ortiz (or Butler or Martinez in Detroit) from holding the job full time.

     

    [/QUOTE] OK,OK,OK.....  B-806 may be stupid & John Farrel enjoyed a great playoff/W S , but if PAPI retired today Ben C . would not have a problem trotting out Carp, Gomes , & Nava and put the rest of the $$$$$ in the Bank !!!


    [/QUOTE]

    may be stupid?? come on bill..... you ARE stupid.

    as a matter of fact, your so stupid that you drop the collective IQ of the forum with the drivel you post. your so stupid that you make crazy claims and then when confronted by others with actual facts, deflect or simply ignore. Or you wait for someone else to make the case/do the research for you and add a BINGO. which makes you lazy and stupid.

    i've yet to see one intelligent and thoughtful post out of you since i've been here.

     

    and before you whine about my lack of respect just know this. i respect people and the opinions of people who deserve it. you are undeserving.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mef429's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hetchinspete's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Roy, 

    What I find amazing is that I've asked Chuck for an explanation of his point of view twice now and have yet to receive a reply. So either Chuck has no basis for his argument or he doesn't care to reply. Either way here it goes for a third time to Chuck if he cares to reply.

    Chuck, 

    If you define a pitcher, starter as well as reliever as a part time player and it seems you believe they can make the HOF, why cannot a DH, a definitive position as of I believe 1970, which again by your definition is also a part time player why cannot a DH make the HOF. I'd love to hear a clear and concise explanation, please.

    Hetch 

     

    [/QUOTE]Not speaking for Chuck..... But I will give you my read on the D H & the HOF.......  The only one we are talking about to date is our own "BIG PAPI".... That said, his #'s are good(pretty/very good) and he has been a force on 3 RED SOX W S champs (been a Sox since 2003-2013+) and that is what our hearts & minds will remember.....  Add to it, his longevity in a SOX unie and we are all counting the 5 years after he retires to "walk thru the door" of the HALL..... Fast forward to today, and I think that we are hard pressed to throw any other names into this conversation.  Add again, the movement by management away from a 1 full time player (@big $$$$) for that position...... John Farrell, if the truth be told, would use 2 to 3 players at that spot if & when Papi retires........  Thats how I see it, & I stand by it !!!


    [/QUOTE]

    there is no way of knowing this as it is a product of availability. teams that currently use multiple DHs are doing so because they either don't have a big bopper without a position to play or one in the minors being blocked. The sox on the other hand are in a different situation entirely. if papi retired today, we have a couple full time DH options available to us and even more (middlebrooks) if we signed Drew. Although none who would be as productive as papi (goes without saying)

     

    as for your assertation that paying "BIG $$$$$$$$" to a single full time DH is bad business refer to the last post on the previous page. the DH GOAT is only making 15M per year. That is a steal for one of the best hitters in the league over the past 3+ seasons. If he was a 1Bman (which is entirely in the realm of possibility) he would be making anywhere from 20-25M per year.

     

    yeah, when papi retires they might platoon @DH but that doesn't mean FT DHs are dead. lots of positions are platooned but that doesn't mean full time players at that position no longer exist. the sox currently platoon LF but that doesn't mean they will never have another FT LF'er again.... it's just a product of availability.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    To add to your point. It's laughable when someone claims that managers would rather use two or three players as DH to give them "flexibility" in the lineup rather than a bat like Ortiz's. You're right -- it's about availability.

    If Ortiz was 30 after the end of last season and hit the free agent market, there would be plenty of teams lining up to sign him. Managers aren't idiots. They'd rather have a guy with a .950-plus OPS hitting 30-plus home runs -- a middle of the order bat -- rather than a bunch of scrubs.

    Let's say Ortiz was gone. Bill can't be that stupid and think that the Farrell would rather platoon Carp-Nava-Gomes in at DH and LF, rather than sticking with Ortiz at DH and platooning the other guys in LF.

    That there aren't more full-time DHs is because there aren't a lot of guys out there like Ortiz. If managers would rather platoon a bunch of guys at that position, why has Kansas City's Bobby Butler played so many games at DH the last three years.

    After playing mostly 1B (145 and 127 games) his first two full seasons in the majors, his last three years have been:

    Age 25: DH-142 G, 1B-11 G.
    Age 26: DH-138 G, 1B-20 G.
    Age 27: DH-150 G, 1B-7 G.

    So he seems to becoming a career DH.

    That the DH is used by multiple players on many teams has more to do with simply not having enough good players or having to move guys around because of injury, rather than simply not wanting a big bat like Ortiz (or Butler or Martinez in Detroit) from holding the job full time.

     

    [/QUOTE] OK,OK,OK.....  B-806 may be stupid & John Farrel enjoyed a great playoff/W S , but if PAPI retired today Ben C . would not have a problem trotting out Carp, Gomes , & Nava and put the rest of the $$$$$ in the Bank !!!


    [/QUOTE]

    Haven't been paying attention to the way the Sox do business, have you. The Sox history with both Theo and Ben have been to continually try to upgrade the team, rather than simply bank the money. So I doubt very much that if Ortiz got hurt or retired today, that Ben would think, "Let's see -- we lost a .300 hitter who has a nearly 1,000 OPS with 30 plus homers and 100-plus RBIs, a guy opposing pitchers fear and will intentionally walk, and we now we'll rotate guys who'll like combine significantly less production at the position. Yup, I'm fine with that. I think I'll simply put my feet up and take a nap."

    If you believe that, you are truly delusional. Ben likely would go out and sign a Morales or try to pry a Butler from the Royals. You'd likely see that blockbusta deal you keep wanting. And that's especially true with the makeup of the team this year where Ortiz and Napoli are the only proven middle-of-the-order bats.

    The Sox traded Iggy because they want more offense at a defensive position. So you really think they'll settle for less offense at an OFFENSIVE position? I can feel my brain cells melting while trying to get my head around that.

    [/QUOTE]

    it's like explaining astrophysics to a toddler..... he simply has no clue about the game of baseball in any aspect at all. you'd have better luck teaching a dog to play guitar.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    just because someone is smarter than you does not make them a know it all. if that were the case, everyone on the forum would be a know-it-all in your eyes.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    you know me. it's all about "HUMORRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to mef429's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    just because someone is smarter than you does not make them a know it all. if that were the case, everyone on the forum would be a know-it-all in your eyes.

    [/QUOTE]


    The problem with bill's comment about "if Papi retired today" is that he used the word "today." Because that kills his point. Based on performances last year, Ortiz was the Sox's best hitter and losing that bat would leave a huge hole in the lineup. It doesn't matter what position he plays.

    If Bill was capable of critical thinking and analysis and was capable of adding better context, he could have presented a stronger argument for replacing Ortiz with Carp-Gomes-Nava.

    Let's play this year and let's say all the three youngsters all emerge and have strong years. Bogarts hits .290-.300 with strong OBP and hits 20 HRs and proves to be able to be a No. 3 hitter. Middlebrooks becomes the big middle of the order bat I think he can be -- .275 or better BA with 30-plus HRs and 100-plus RBIs -- and Bradley bats .280 or better with a .350 OBP and 15 HRs (he seems to have that sort of power) and the Sox w/o Ortiz in 2015 can go Bradley-Pedroia-Bogaerts-Middlebrooks-Napoli-A.J. at 1 through 6 (switch Napoli and Middlebrooks) and put Victorino at No. 9 then using some sort of combination of Carp-Nava-Gomes at seven and eight, then yeah, a case can be made of going with the platoon at DH.

    In the above scenario, you're not replacing Ortiz with the platoon, you're replacing him with Middlebrooks. The platoon would be replacing what Drew gave at SS or what the Sox got combined at 3B last year.

    It's all about context. The only context bill was capable of giving was saying "today," which means all we have to go on is recent performances.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    FanGraphs has David Ortiz valued at 40.9 WAR in 1,969 games, Carlos Beltran at 64.2 WAR inb 2,064 games and Edgar Martinez at 65.1 WAR in 2,055 games.

    Baseball Reference has Ortiz valued at 44.2 WAR, Beltran at 67.5 WAR and Martinez at 68.3 WAR.

    But taken literally, it's a Hall of Fame, not a Hall of Baseball's Best Players. Because Ortiz played in the national spotlight on three World Series champions, Ortiz probably rides the fame to get the nod over Beltran and Martinez despite a significantly inferior career WAR.

    [/QUOTE]

    This^^

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    OK, I'll break my own rule and respond

    He runs the bases better than you give him credit for or haven't you been paying attention. Running doesn't necessarily mean stolen bases. If he didn't run the bases, he wouldn't have as many doubles as he does or even the few triples.

    He can play 1B and is better at 1B than other guys in the pre-DH days who played a position out of necessity. Beyond that, few players in the Hall of Fame are in their because of their defense. Yes, there are some players where that helped.

    But most hitters are judged strictly on offensive numbers. Is Reggie Jackson in the Hall of Fame because of his defense. No. He's a .262 career hitter who is in the Hall of Fame because he hit 563 HRs.

    If Ortiz was to reach the numbers I posted on the previous page, he would have 506 HRs, 1,699 RBIs, 610 doubles, 1,448 runs. Jackson's numbers are 563 HRs, 1,702 RBIs, 463 doubles, 1,551 runs.

    And to add, Ortiz's career batting is more than 20 points higher, while Jackson set the career record for most strikeouts.

    So except for Jackson hitting about 60 more home runs, Ortiz's numbers would be similar or even better if you consider extra-base hits in total.

    Yet by your rationale, are you saying Jackson is a HOF simply because he played mediocre or worse defense?

    Well said. It shouldn't help Papi's cause if he played 1B for 10 seasons at below average quality.

    The DH is a MLB position. He is the best DH to ever play the position. If a DH does not belong in the HOF, then what's the point in having one at all?

    [/QUOTE]

    That's what I was going to say! How can MLB create a position called DH and then say it's not eligible for the HOF?

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to youkillus' comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Throw out the numbers! Ortiz's walk off jobs are his ticket to Cooperstown. Dig into the records, and find a guy with more cachet. If there is one, that guy is a HOF'er. To me, the HOF is to celebrate greatness, those moments that transfixed the fans, that made everyone realize that, "they can't believe what they just saw". Whether it's Mays running down drives in the outfield, Gibson limping around the bases, or Fisk dinging the foul pole, that's what the HOF is for. Ortiz is in, with his own wing too.

    [/QUOTE]

    And this^^

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Is Mariano Rivera a Hall of Famer? If he and other great closers, whose job is to record three outs (usually) in something less than half the games their team will play in any given season, warrant HOF consideration, then I can't see why designated hitters shouldn't.  

    [/QUOTE]

    And that's all he does. He doesn't hit the ball. (And he's been helped along the way by bad calls as well.)

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to royf19's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hetchinspete's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Roy, 

    What I find amazing is that I've asked Chuck for an explanation of his point of view twice now and have yet to receive a reply. So either Chuck has no basis for his argument or he doesn't care to reply. Either way here it goes for a third time to Chuck if he cares to reply.

    Chuck, 

    If you define a pitcher, starter as well as reliever as a part time player and it seems you believe they can make the HOF, why cannot a DH, a definitive position as of I believe 1970, which again by your definition is also a part time player why cannot a DH make the HOF. I'd love to hear a clear and concise explanation, please.

    Hetch 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, that part-time comment or being an incomplete player got me. I'll leave starting pitchers in A.L. out of it, although starters in general aren't the same workhorses they used to be in the days of four-man rotations and 38 to 40 starts a year, rather than 30 to 33.

    But closers. Even the best closers are usually incomplete players. They're relievers because they couldn't hack it as a starter because they usually have just one, maybe two effective pitches. Starters typically need more than that. Then beyond that, we're talking about players who play typically 60 to 80 innings a year. Can't get more parttime than that. 

    So if someone is going to hold being a DH against Ortiz, then they certainly shouldn't want closers in the Hall. That's even more part-time and incomplete of a player.

    [/QUOTE]

    Exactly, Roy.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    What happened to "Chuck"????

    Where'd he go? 

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from jete02fan. Show jete02fan's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Is Mariano Rivera a Hall of Famer?   

    [/QUOTE] is David Ortiz a Hall of Famer?....Hill's post to Kim above touts Big P's central role in the Sox' three titles....i fully acknowledge there's likely more than that, but if you are going by central roles to title teams, then Flapjack's question shouldn't even entertain a debate...FTR, he's already the best that's ever done it, and barring an offensive meltdown, i believe he'll get in...


     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: A case for David Ortiz to the HOF

    In response to jete02fan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Is Mariano Rivera a Hall of Famer?   

    [/QUOTE] is David Ortiz a Hall of Famer?....Hill's post to Kim above touts Big P's central role in the Sox' three titles....i fully acknowledge there's likely more than that, but if you are going by central roles to title teams, then Flapjack's question shouldn't even entertain a debate...FTR, he's already the best that's ever done it, and barring an offensive meltdown, i believe he'll get in...


    [/QUOTE]

    As big of an Ortiz fan as I am, I'd like to see him add to his career stats a bit more so he can seperate from the pack a bit more. The postseason success does help him however.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share