Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The 10-member Fielding Bible panel never gave Jacoby Ellsbury a single vote until 2011 despite the presence of Bill James on the panel.

    [/QUOTE]


    But what proves they are biased is that they did not give the award to Robinson Cano, who is not only yhr best defensive second baseman ThatWasMe has ever seen, he was also the only one he saw all year.   How could these so-called baseball experts even vote for a guy ThatWasMe never heard of before??

     

    It is shameful what this is coming to.  Bring back the days of The Gold Glove.  Now there was an award with no biased voting ever...

    [/QUOTE]


    Sour grapes.

    Pedroia has won the GG award twice as has Cano, I could have lived with either in 2012.

    And I didn't cry or protest when Gardner was denied. Alex Gordan was a repeat winner in LF for 2012.

    None of the awards are perfect (or as unbiased like the fielding bible is I guess to Sox fans).

    I'll continue to believe my lying eyes.

    Peace and Love. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    We might be more apt to agree with you, if you could provide a shred of evidence, as to the bias you keep referring to.

    Sorry if your esteemed opinion isn't enough for most of us.

    [/QUOTE]

    As a life long Yankee fan why should I be suspicious of bias if a narrow decision between Cano and Pedroia rests in the hands of James and Gammons?

    Don't suppose any of you would be suspicious if it was Michael kaye and Paul O'Neil.

    But actually i don't care what you think.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd certainly have my suspicions, but I'd be smart enough to keep my mouth shut, unless I had some evidence.

    No one would care what I thought, if I just blathered on, with nothing to back it up.

     

    Again, got any evidence that either are biased in their voting?

    I'm guessing, after two days, the answer is still "no".

     

     

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yeah Bill James has no connections to any organization.

    And that disqualifies him from voting for Teixeira in what way?

    [/QUOTE]


    Typical James pick fluff Tex so you can diss Cano.

    Folks here trying to sell this award as more reputable as the GG is a joke, my first problem.

    As if these picks are beyond favoritism.

    I don't know what James watches but from where I sit Robinson Cano is the best defensive second baseman in all of baseball hands down, he certainly has the best arm I've ever seen.

    That being said If I had a team and had to pick a 2nd baseman I'd pick Pedroia.

    Knowing he doesn't have the skills at second Cano has.Not that he is bad.

    But Pedroia is more focused has more desire and intangibles imo.

     

    [/QUOTE]


     

    Right, we would never catch you using compliments about another player as a method of obscuring your biases as well as add credibility to other slights.  You're way above that.  (<-- sarcasm, by the way)

     

    Ironically, you must have missed that Bill James did not give his top vote to either Cano or Pedroia.   He voted for Darwin Barney.  And blaming James one vote on a panel of ten is pretty stupid, too.  By the way, none of the 10 panelists gave Cano a top vote, and only 4 voted him as high as 2 (one of whom was Rob Neyer, who is normally dismissed by the "use your eyes" crowd who thinks sabermetrics are biased, but only watching one player play all year isn't).  I'd be very interested in how all of these panelists are clearly biased for the Red Sox.  The argument for Doug Glanville should be very enlightening.

     

    By the way, have you ever seen 2012 Fielding Bible 2nd Baseman Darwin Barney play? I am guessing not, since you think Cano clearly has the best arm at the position.   Did you also know Barney set the single-season errorless streak for second basemen this season?   Please tell us more about how watching Cano play 162 times has educated you about all the other second basemen you have never seen play.

     

    Not your best work...

    [/QUOTE]
    .

    I've seen Barney play, what makes you think that you follow the game closer than I do or have seen more games than I?

    What doe Barney's errorless streak have to do with Cano's arm strength?

    Does not disapprove that Cano has superior arm strength or superior throwing ability.

    Never denied I'm biased, I'm a life long Yankee fan, maybe you missed that.

    I'm guessing all the angry like you responding to me have a bias too.

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The 10-member Fielding Bible panel never gave Jacoby Ellsbury a single vote until 2011 despite the presence of Bill James on the panel.

    [/QUOTE]


    But what proves they are biased is that they did not give the award to Robinson Cano, who is not only yhr best defensive second baseman ThatWasMe has ever seen, he was also the only one he saw all year.   How could these so-called baseball experts even vote for a guy ThatWasMe never heard of before??

     

    It is shameful what this is coming to.  Bring back the days of The Gold Glove.  Now there was an award with no biased voting ever...

    [/QUOTE]


    Sour grapes.

    Pedroia has won the GG award twice as has Cano, I could have lived with either in 2012.

    And I didn't cry or protest when Gardner was denied. Alex Gordan was a repeat winner in LF for 2012.

    None of the awards are perfect (or as unbiased like the fielding bible is I guess to Sox fans).

    I'll continue to believe my lying eyes.

    Peace and Love. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    We might be more apt to agree with you, if you could provide a shred of evidence, as to the bias you keep referring to.

    Sorry if your esteemed opinion isn't enough for most of us.

    [/QUOTE]

    As a life long Yankee fan why should I be suspicious of bias if a narrow decision between Cano and Pedroia rests in the hands of James and Gammons?

    Don't suppose any of you would be suspicious if it was Michael kaye and Paul O'Neil.

    But actually i don't care what you think.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd certainly have my suspicions, but I'd be smart enough to keep my mouth shut, unless I had some evidence.

    No one would care what I thought, if I just blathered on, with nothing to back it up.

     

    Again, got any evidence that either are biased in their voting?

    I'm guessing, after two days, the answer is still "no".

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    The same evidence that you and your crowd use to diminish the GGs.

    Personal opinion.

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The 10-member Fielding Bible panel never gave Jacoby Ellsbury a single vote until 2011 despite the presence of Bill James on the panel.

    [/QUOTE]


    But what proves they are biased is that they did not give the award to Robinson Cano, who is not only yhr best defensive second baseman ThatWasMe has ever seen, he was also the only one he saw all year.   How could these so-called baseball experts even vote for a guy ThatWasMe never heard of before??

     

    It is shameful what this is coming to.  Bring back the days of The Gold Glove.  Now there was an award with no biased voting ever...

    [/QUOTE]


    Sour grapes.

    Pedroia has won the GG award twice as has Cano, I could have lived with either in 2012.

    And I didn't cry or protest when Gardner was denied. Alex Gordan was a repeat winner in LF for 2012.

    None of the awards are perfect (or as unbiased like the fielding bible is I guess to Sox fans).

    I'll continue to believe my lying eyes.

    Peace and Love. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    We might be more apt to agree with you, if you could provide a shred of evidence, as to the bias you keep referring to.

    Sorry if your esteemed opinion isn't enough for most of us.

    [/QUOTE]

    As a life long Yankee fan why should I be suspicious of bias if a narrow decision between Cano and Pedroia rests in the hands of James and Gammons?

    Don't suppose any of you would be suspicious if it was Michael kaye and Paul O'Neil.

    But actually i don't care what you think.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd certainly have my suspicions, but I'd be smart enough to keep my mouth shut, unless I had some evidence.

    No one would care what I thought, if I just blathered on, with nothing to back it up.

     

    Again, got any evidence that either are biased in their voting?

    I'm guessing, after two days, the answer is still "no".

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You don't like the GG picks, great.

    I didn't care for Cano picked behind Barney and Pedroia.

    See the pattern?

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The 10-member Fielding Bible panel never gave Jacoby Ellsbury a single vote until 2011 despite the presence of Bill James on the panel.

    [/QUOTE]


    But what proves they are biased is that they did not give the award to Robinson Cano, who is not only yhr best defensive second baseman ThatWasMe has ever seen, he was also the only one he saw all year.   How could these so-called baseball experts even vote for a guy ThatWasMe never heard of before??

     

    It is shameful what this is coming to.  Bring back the days of The Gold Glove.  Now there was an award with no biased voting ever...

    [/QUOTE]


    Sour grapes.

    Pedroia has won the GG award twice as has Cano, I could have lived with either in 2012.

    And I didn't cry or protest when Gardner was denied. Alex Gordan was a repeat winner in LF for 2012.

    None of the awards are perfect (or as unbiased like the fielding bible is I guess to Sox fans).

    I'll continue to believe my lying eyes.

    Peace and Love. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    We might be more apt to agree with you, if you could provide a shred of evidence, as to the bias you keep referring to.

    Sorry if your esteemed opinion isn't enough for most of us.

    [/QUOTE]

    As a life long Yankee fan why should I be suspicious of bias if a narrow decision between Cano and Pedroia rests in the hands of James and Gammons?

    Don't suppose any of you would be suspicious if it was Michael kaye and Paul O'Neil.

    But actually i don't care what you think.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd certainly have my suspicions, but I'd be smart enough to keep my mouth shut, unless I had some evidence.

    No one would care what I thought, if I just blathered on, with nothing to back it up.

     

    Again, got any evidence that either are biased in their voting?

    I'm guessing, after two days, the answer is still "no".

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You don't like the GG picks, great.

    I didn't care for Cano picked behind Barney and Pedroia.

    See the pattern?

    [/QUOTE]

    If it's as simple as that, you shouldn't have led off with your conspiracy theory.

    You want to back off that now? Be my guest...

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The 10-member Fielding Bible panel never gave Jacoby Ellsbury a single vote until 2011 despite the presence of Bill James on the panel.

    [/QUOTE]


    But what proves they are biased is that they did not give the award to Robinson Cano, who is not only yhr best defensive second baseman ThatWasMe has ever seen, he was also the only one he saw all year.   How could these so-called baseball experts even vote for a guy ThatWasMe never heard of before??

     

    It is shameful what this is coming to.  Bring back the days of The Gold Glove.  Now there was an award with no biased voting ever...

    [/QUOTE]


    Sour grapes.

    Pedroia has won the GG award twice as has Cano, I could have lived with either in 2012.

    And I didn't cry or protest when Gardner was denied. Alex Gordan was a repeat winner in LF for 2012.

    None of the awards are perfect (or as unbiased like the fielding bible is I guess to Sox fans).

    I'll continue to believe my lying eyes.

    Peace and Love. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    We might be more apt to agree with you, if you could provide a shred of evidence, as to the bias you keep referring to.

    Sorry if your esteemed opinion isn't enough for most of us.

    [/QUOTE]

    As a life long Yankee fan why should I be suspicious of bias if a narrow decision between Cano and Pedroia rests in the hands of James and Gammons?

    Don't suppose any of you would be suspicious if it was Michael kaye and Paul O'Neil.

    But actually i don't care what you think.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd certainly have my suspicions, but I'd be smart enough to keep my mouth shut, unless I had some evidence.

    No one would care what I thought, if I just blathered on, with nothing to back it up.

     

    Again, got any evidence that either are biased in their voting?

    I'm guessing, after two days, the answer is still "no".

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You don't like the GG picks, great.

    I didn't care for Cano picked behind Barney and Pedroia.

    See the pattern?

    [/QUOTE]

    If it's as simple as that, you shouldn't have led off with your conspiracy theory.

    You want to back off that now? Be my guest...

    [/QUOTE]


    So the "B" in 4 B's isn't an abbreviation for brain.

    You expect me to believe James and Gammons have no bias?

    Neyer or Glanville?

    Pure as the freshly fallen snow.

    Yeah ok.

     

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    I put more trust into the choices made by the managers and coaches of the game than that crew.

    The big difference I see is that the fielding bible has made a cottage industry out of criticizing GG choices to sell their own product.

    The managers and coaches who pick the GGs and MLB couldn't care less what that group thinks.

     I've read critical opinions of the fielding bible from former players who also follow the game.

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to nhsteven's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Derek Jeter won the GG in 2009 and 2010.

    Is there anything else that needs to be said about the absolute meaninglessness of the Gold Glove Award?

    They gave the award to Palmeiro one year, when he barely played 1B that season. It's a popularity contest... nothing more.

    [/QUOTE]

    It sounds like Brooks Robinson, who won 16 consecutive GGs, wasn't really that good then.

    [/QUOTE]


    Even a broken clock is right 16 times in 8 days.

    [/QUOTE]

    A wayward metaphor (such as this one) doesn't properly characterize imperfect judging systems, even if they use imperfect metrics (as they all are, but the fielding ones appear to be the most controversial)  ... and that's true for all awards, of all endeavors; (and as well considering the imperfect human element), recall how TW was gipped of an MVP because a sportswriter had an axe to grind; no  matter; when Jeter gets his plaque, the GGs, even if of dubious distinction (especially the last) shall be proudly listed; something Palmiero shall never see.

    And, BTW, some felt Clete Boyer should have won a couple of Brooksie's; many complained about Grace Kelly beating out Judy Garland in the 50s & Shakespeare In Love edging out Saving Private Ryan a while back (There's actually at least a dozen different major Movie Award events, and most of the time they don't agree) ; others criticized the laudations Einstein received; and so it goes.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from susan250. Show susan250's posts

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    For those who hate fielding metrics, this is a much better indicator of fielding talent that the GG award voting.

    [/QUOTE]


    Dont get me wrong, some deserve it, but the GG award is mostly a popularity contest based on prior GG's...

    [/QUOTE]

    The GG glove award is a total joke. 

    [/QUOTE]
    I was happy to see Reddick win the award.  I also believe that Adrian Beltre deserved it.   Beltre is one player that I still believe the Red Sox should have resigned when they had the chance. 

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]

    If it's as simple as that, you shouldn't have led off with your conspiracy theory.

    You want to back off that now? Be my guest...

    [/QUOTE]


    So the "B" in 4 B's isn't an abbreviation for brain.

    You expect me to believe James and Gammons have no bias?

    Neyer or Glanville?

    Pure as the freshly fallen snow.

    Yeah ok.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I never said they have no bias.

    Try to keep up...

    Adults are usually able to set aside their biases in order to accomplish a job.

    If it's so obvious to you that the Fielding Bible panel showed bias in their voting, you should be able to demonstrate it.

    If "I know what my eye tell me" is all you got, then that's all anyone needs to know.

     

    I can demonstrate that the GG voters can be grossing incompetent with their picks by selecting Rafael Palmeiro as their 1999 GG winner.

    If you think Palmeiro deserved a GG for 28 games, you've slept through a lot more games than you've watched.

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]

    If it's as simple as that, you shouldn't have led off with your conspiracy theory.

    You want to back off that now? Be my guest...

    [/QUOTE]


    So the "B" in 4 B's isn't an abbreviation for brain.

    You expect me to believe James and Gammons have no bias?

    Neyer or Glanville?

    Pure as the freshly fallen snow.

    Yeah ok.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I never said they have no bias.

    Try to keep up...

    Adults are usually able to set aside their biases in order to accomplish a job.

    If it's so obvious to you that the Fielding Bible panel showed bias in their voting, you should be able to demonstrate it.

    If "I know what my eye tell me" is all you got, then that's all anyone needs to know.

     

    I can demonstrate that the GG voters can be grossing incompetent with their picks by selecting Rafael Palmeiro as their 1999 GG winner.

    If you think Palmeiro deserved a GG for 28 games, you've slept through a lot more games than you've watched.

    [/QUOTE]


    If you keep coming back to one example for an award that for the most part had 18 winners for the past 55 years I'd say you really don't have much.

    Show me one of the annual baseball awards that is without dispute for one pick or another.

    Nothing is perfect. Look at the results of the fans picking the All Stars if you want a farce.

    I originally posted here a few days ago voicing my displeasure at Cano being picked behind Barney and Pedroia a few days later the GG awards validate my opinion (at least in the AL).

    I know it's hard to swallow but accept it because it isn't going to change.

    Not this season anyway.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ADG. Show ADG's posts

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    Who cares? Fielding awards are a joke. Case in point Mike Trout not winning. Pedroia could be the best fielder in the world, but if the pitching stinks what does it matter?

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]

    If it's as simple as that, you shouldn't have led off with your conspiracy theory.

    You want to back off that now? Be my guest...

    [/QUOTE]


    So the "B" in 4 B's isn't an abbreviation for brain.

    You expect me to believe James and Gammons have no bias?

    Neyer or Glanville?

    Pure as the freshly fallen snow.

    Yeah ok.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I never said they have no bias.

    Try to keep up...

    Adults are usually able to set aside their biases in order to accomplish a job.

    If it's so obvious to you that the Fielding Bible panel showed bias in their voting, you should be able to demonstrate it.

    If "I know what my eye tell me" is all you got, then that's all anyone needs to know.

     

    I can demonstrate that the GG voters can be grossing incompetent with their picks by selecting Rafael Palmeiro as their 1999 GG winner.

    If you think Palmeiro deserved a GG for 28 games, you've slept through a lot more games than you've watched.

    [/QUOTE]


    If you keep coming back to one example for an award that for the most part had 18 winners for the past 55 years I'd say you really don't have much.

    Show me one of the annual baseball awards that is without dispute for one pick or another.

    Nothing is perfect. Look at the results of the fans picking the All Stars if you want a farce.

    I originally posted here a few days ago voicing my displeasure at Cano being picked behind Barney and Pedroia a few days later the GG awards validate my opinion (at least in the AL).

    I know it's hard to swallow but accept it because it isn't going to change.

    Not this season anyway.

    [/QUOTE]

    No one said any award was perfect.

    You said more than that you were displeased. You said it was because panel memebers were affiliated with the Red sox and voted accordlingly.

    When asked for examples, you went with this whole nonsense about GG being fair, wothout providing any evidence to back up your "anti-Yankee' conspiracy.

    Another poster even told you that James didn't vote for Cano OR Pedrioa.

    You just shoved your head further in the sand (I'd use anothe analogy, but I don't want to be crude).


    I know it's hard to swallow but accept it because it isn't going to change.

    Enjoy the veiw. I know the rest of us will.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    Columnist Larry Stone at the Seattle Times offers his take on the Gold Glove Awards (with a link to an academic study):

    http://seattletimes.com/html/thehotstoneleague/2019563315_best_indicator_of_2012_gold_gl.html

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    Dont get me wrong, some deserve it, but the GG award is mostly a popularity contest based on prior GG's...

    It's based more on name recognition and popularity, sometimes influenced by things that have nothing to do with fielding.

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]

    If it's as simple as that, you shouldn't have led off with your conspiracy theory.

    You want to back off that now? Be my guest...

    [/QUOTE]


    So the "B" in 4 B's isn't an abbreviation for brain.

    You expect me to believe James and Gammons have no bias?

    Neyer or Glanville?

    Pure as the freshly fallen snow.

    Yeah ok.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I never said they have no bias.

    Try to keep up...

    Adults are usually able to set aside their biases in order to accomplish a job.

    If it's so obvious to you that the Fielding Bible panel showed bias in their voting, you should be able to demonstrate it.

    If "I know what my eye tell me" is all you got, then that's all anyone needs to know.

     

    I can demonstrate that the GG voters can be grossing incompetent with their picks by selecting Rafael Palmeiro as their 1999 GG winner.

    If you think Palmeiro deserved a GG for 28 games, you've slept through a lot more games than you've watched.

    [/QUOTE]


    If you keep coming back to one example for an award that for the most part had 18 winners for the past 55 years I'd say you really don't have much.

    Show me one of the annual baseball awards that is without dispute for one pick or another.

    Nothing is perfect. Look at the results of the fans picking the All Stars if you want a farce.

    I originally posted here a few days ago voicing my displeasure at Cano being picked behind Barney and Pedroia a few days later the GG awards validate my opinion (at least in the AL).

    I know it's hard to swallow but accept it because it isn't going to change.

    Not this season anyway.

    [/QUOTE]

    No one said any award was perfect.

    You said more than that you were displeased. You said it was because panel memebers were affiliated with the Red sox and voted accordlingly.

    When asked for examples, you went with this whole nonsense about GG being fair, wothout providing any evidence to back up your "anti-Yankee' conspiracy.

    Another poster even told you that James didn't vote for Cano OR Pedrioa.

    You just shoved your head further in the sand (I'd use anothe analogy, but I don't want to be crude).


    I know it's hard to swallow but accept it because it isn't going to change.

    Enjoy the veiw. I know the rest of us will.

    [/QUOTE]

     

    Is that what I wrote?

    Don't put words in my mouth.

    I wrote everyone has a bias including James and the other cast of characters at the fielding bible.

    And I stand by what i said about James being employed by and a fan of the Red Sox, not to mention Gammons.

    James opinions are based on his perceptions, he is human, he isn't a god, he doesn't walk on water.

     

     

     

     

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]

    If it's as simple as that, you shouldn't have led off with your conspiracy theory.

    You want to back off that now? Be my guest...

    [/QUOTE]


    So the "B" in 4 B's isn't an abbreviation for brain.

    You expect me to believe James and Gammons have no bias?

    Neyer or Glanville?

    Pure as the freshly fallen snow.

    Yeah ok.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I never said they have no bias.

    Try to keep up...

    Adults are usually able to set aside their biases in order to accomplish a job.

    If it's so obvious to you that the Fielding Bible panel showed bias in their voting, you should be able to demonstrate it.

    If "I know what my eye tell me" is all you got, then that's all anyone needs to know.

     

    I can demonstrate that the GG voters can be grossing incompetent with their picks by selecting Rafael Palmeiro as their 1999 GG winner.

    If you think Palmeiro deserved a GG for 28 games, you've slept through a lot more games than you've watched.

    [/QUOTE]


    If you keep coming back to one example for an award that for the most part had 18 winners for the past 55 years I'd say you really don't have much.

    Show me one of the annual baseball awards that is without dispute for one pick or another.

    Nothing is perfect. Look at the results of the fans picking the All Stars if you want a farce.

    I originally posted here a few days ago voicing my displeasure at Cano being picked behind Barney and Pedroia a few days later the GG awards validate my opinion (at least in the AL).

    I know it's hard to swallow but accept it because it isn't going to change.

    Not this season anyway.

    [/QUOTE]

    No one said any award was perfect.

    You said more than that you were displeased. You said it was because panel memebers were affiliated with the Red sox and voted accordlingly.

    When asked for examples, you went with this whole nonsense about GG being fair, wothout providing any evidence to back up your "anti-Yankee' conspiracy.

    Another poster even told you that James didn't vote for Cano OR Pedrioa.

    You just shoved your head further in the sand (I'd use anothe analogy, but I don't want to be crude).


    I know it's hard to swallow but accept it because it isn't going to change.

    Enjoy the veiw. I know the rest of us will.

    [/QUOTE]


    You seem to be angry Cano won the GG and upset that I don't view the fielding bible in the same high esteem that you seem to.

    Sorry.

    And I am trying to remain civil but we have really spilled our guts here, not much more i can say.

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to Dutch1914's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    For those who hate fielding metrics, this is a much better indicator of fielding talent that the GG award voting.

    [/QUOTE]


    Dont get me wrong, some deserve it, but the GG award is mostly a popularity contest based on prior GG's...

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah Bill James has no connections to any organization.

    [/QUOTE]

    What's your point? These awards are voted on by a comprehensive panel of statasticians, scouts, former players, writers, etc. Sounds like you just can't handle the fact that Cano won a GG he didn't deserve.

    [/QUOTE]


    Sounds like you just can't handle the fact Cano won the GG.

    Thanks for putting everything into perspective.

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The 10-member Fielding Bible panel never gave Jacoby Ellsbury a single vote until 2011 despite the presence of Bill James on the panel.

    [/QUOTE]


    But what proves they are biased is that they did not give the award to Robinson Cano, who is not only yhr best defensive second baseman ThatWasMe has ever seen, he was also the only one he saw all year.   How could these so-called baseball experts even vote for a guy ThatWasMe never heard of before??

     

    It is shameful what this is coming to.  Bring back the days of The Gold Glove.  Now there was an award with no biased voting ever...

    [/QUOTE]


    Sour grapes.

    Pedroia has won the GG award twice as has Cano, I could have lived with either in 2012.

    And I didn't cry or protest when Gardner was denied. Alex Gordan was a repeat winner in LF for 2012.

    None of the awards are perfect (or as unbiased like the fielding bible is I guess to Sox fans).

    I'll continue to believe my lying eyes.

    Peace and Love. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    We might be more apt to agree with you, if you could provide a shred of evidence, as to the bias you keep referring to.

    Sorry if your esteemed opinion isn't enough for most of us.

    [/QUOTE]

    As a life long Yankee fan why should I be suspicious of bias if a narrow decision between Cano and Pedroia rests in the hands of James and Gammons?

    Don't suppose any of you would be suspicious if it was Michael kaye and Paul O'Neil.

    But actually i don't care what you think.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd certainly have my suspicions, but I'd be smart enough to keep my mouth shut, unless I had some evidence.

    No one would care what I thought, if I just blathered on, with nothing to back it up.

     

    Again, got any evidence that either are biased in their voting?

    I'm guessing, after two days, the answer is still "no".

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You don't like the GG picks, great.

    I didn't care for Cano picked behind Barney and Pedroia.

    See the pattern?

    [/QUOTE]

    Addiong Barney is new to yuor complaint, which was that Gammons and James pro-Sox bias heavily influeced the Fielding Bible.  The reality is, not one panelist picked either Pedroia or Cano, and the distinct possibility it that because neither were actually the best in the field last season.

     

    You act as though 8 panelists picked Cano first, and Gammons and James omitted Cano altogether, costing him the award.  And I suppose that is somewhat of a parallel to the 1999 AL MVP voting, when pro-Yankee schlep George King left Pedro Martinez off his ballot, costing Pedro the MVP.  King cited he did not think pitchers should be eligible.  Ignoring the written rules for MVP voting, which explicitly state pitchers are eligible,  the real irony was the sudden change in heart of King, who did include a vote for then-Yankee David Wells on his 1998 AL MVP ballot.

     

    See, that is how you sho evidence of bias.  All you have shown is evidence of selective paranoia...

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The 10-member Fielding Bible panel never gave Jacoby Ellsbury a single vote until 2011 despite the presence of Bill James on the panel.

    [/QUOTE]


    But what proves they are biased is that they did not give the award to Robinson Cano, who is not only yhr best defensive second baseman ThatWasMe has ever seen, he was also the only one he saw all year.   How could these so-called baseball experts even vote for a guy ThatWasMe never heard of before??

     

    It is shameful what this is coming to.  Bring back the days of The Gold Glove.  Now there was an award with no biased voting ever...

    [/QUOTE]


    Sour grapes.

    Pedroia has won the GG award twice as has Cano, I could have lived with either in 2012.

    And I didn't cry or protest when Gardner was denied. Alex Gordan was a repeat winner in LF for 2012.

    None of the awards are perfect (or as unbiased like the fielding bible is I guess to Sox fans).

    I'll continue to believe my lying eyes.

    Peace and Love. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    We might be more apt to agree with you, if you could provide a shred of evidence, as to the bias you keep referring to.

    Sorry if your esteemed opinion isn't enough for most of us.

    [/QUOTE]

    As a life long Yankee fan why should I be suspicious of bias if a narrow decision between Cano and Pedroia rests in the hands of James and Gammons?

    Don't suppose any of you would be suspicious if it was Michael kaye and Paul O'Neil.

    But actually i don't care what you think.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd certainly have my suspicions, but I'd be smart enough to keep my mouth shut, unless I had some evidence.

    No one would care what I thought, if I just blathered on, with nothing to back it up.

     

    Again, got any evidence that either are biased in their voting?

    I'm guessing, after two days, the answer is still "no".

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You don't like the GG picks, great.

    I didn't care for Cano picked behind Barney and Pedroia.

    See the pattern?

    [/QUOTE]

    Addiong Barney is new to yuor complaint, which was that Gammons and James pro-Sox bias heavily influeced the Fielding Bible.  The reality is, not one panelist picked either Pedroia or Cano, and the distinct possibility it that because neither were actually the best in the field last season.

     

    You act as though 8 panelists picked Cano first, and Gammons and James omitted Cano altogether, costing him the award.  And I suppose that is somewhat of a parallel to the 1999 AL MVP voting, when pro-Yankee schlep George King left Pedro Martinez off his ballot, costing Pedro the MVP.  King cited he did not think pitchers should be eligible.  Ignoring the written rules for MVP voting, which explicitly state pitchers are eligible,  the real irony was the sudden change in heart of King, who did include a vote for then-Yankee David Wells on his 1998 AL MVP ballot.

     

    See, that is how you sho evidence of bias.  All you have shown is evidence of selective paranoia...

    [/QUOTE]

    Paranoid?

    Cano won the gg.

    I'm delighted.

     

     

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    You guys are upset because.

    1) I showed up here after the results of the fielding bible and opined Cano was the best defensive 2nd baseman in the game.

    2) Cano won the GG.

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

     

    I bet the GG was slimed both times Pedroia won the award.

    I bet if Pedroia won this season there would not be one negative comment on this thread about the GG selection process.

    Just a gut feeling.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Pedroia runner-up on Fielding Bible list

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The 10-member Fielding Bible panel never gave Jacoby Ellsbury a single vote until 2011 despite the presence of Bill James on the panel.

    [/QUOTE]


    But what proves they are biased is that they did not give the award to Robinson Cano, who is not only yhr best defensive second baseman ThatWasMe has ever seen, he was also the only one he saw all year.   How could these so-called baseball experts even vote for a guy ThatWasMe never heard of before??

     

    It is shameful what this is coming to.  Bring back the days of The Gold Glove.  Now there was an award with no biased voting ever...

    [/QUOTE]


    Sour grapes.

    Pedroia has won the GG award twice as has Cano, I could have lived with either in 2012.

    And I didn't cry or protest when Gardner was denied. Alex Gordan was a repeat winner in LF for 2012.

    None of the awards are perfect (or as unbiased like the fielding bible is I guess to Sox fans).

    I'll continue to believe my lying eyes.

    Peace and Love. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    We might be more apt to agree with you, if you could provide a shred of evidence, as to the bias you keep referring to.

    Sorry if your esteemed opinion isn't enough for most of us.

    [/QUOTE]

    As a life long Yankee fan why should I be suspicious of bias if a narrow decision between Cano and Pedroia rests in the hands of James and Gammons?

    Don't suppose any of you would be suspicious if it was Michael kaye and Paul O'Neil.

    But actually i don't care what you think.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd certainly have my suspicions, but I'd be smart enough to keep my mouth shut, unless I had some evidence.

    No one would care what I thought, if I just blathered on, with nothing to back it up.

     

    Again, got any evidence that either are biased in their voting?

    I'm guessing, after two days, the answer is still "no".

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You don't like the GG picks, great.

    I didn't care for Cano picked behind Barney and Pedroia.

    See the pattern?

    [/QUOTE]

    Addiong Barney is new to yuor complaint, which was that Gammons and James pro-Sox bias heavily influeced the Fielding Bible.  The reality is, not one panelist picked either Pedroia or Cano, and the distinct possibility it that because neither were actually the best in the field last season.

     

    You act as though 8 panelists picked Cano first, and Gammons and James omitted Cano altogether, costing him the award.  And I suppose that is somewhat of a parallel to the 1999 AL MVP voting, when pro-Yankee schlep George King left Pedro Martinez off his ballot, costing Pedro the MVP.  King cited he did not think pitchers should be eligible.  Ignoring the written rules for MVP voting, which explicitly state pitchers are eligible,  the real irony was the sudden change in heart of King, who did include a vote for then-Yankee David Wells on his 1998 AL MVP ballot.

     

    See, that is how you sho evidence of bias.  All you have shown is evidence of selective paranoia...

    [/QUOTE]

    Paranoid?

    Cano won the gg.

    I'm delighted.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


     

    And that is fine.   Hopefully it will satisfy you to the point where you don't make accusations every time an award gets handed out to a player not on the Yankees.

     

    Of course, not one Sox fan has accused the gold Glove process of bias.  Flaws, maybe.  But not bias...

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share