In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:
In response to moonslav59's comment:
Defense matter more to me than almost anyone here. I was not taking sides here. I agree the trade looks bad so far. I was just saying that, like Plantier, Josh could just be a flash in the pan. I also mentioned his defense will probably keep him in MLB longer than Phil's 8 years.
Try to understand what others post instead of inventing strawmen.
Now I understand.
You made the worst comparison you could come up with. Why would you pick Phil Plantier who couldn't field AT ALL?
It's a lousy comparison to make a goofy point "he could be a flash in the pan"
So could Mike Trout. He could be a flash in the pan. Bryce Harper? Could be a flash in the pan.
I wasn't the one who made the initial comparison. I was just responding to another poster's comment about Reddick and Plantier. I tried to say that both could be similar in the fact that they had a great start then declined quickly.
I'm not saying Reddick will. I don'tthink he will.
You are still inventing strawmen.
The "could be" a flash does have some evidence involved, as in Josh's 2nd half of 2012 collapse. Perhaps it was just a slump, but it could also be that the league figured out how to get him out, and unless Josh adjusts, he may never put up numbers like he did from April to june in 2012 again. Is that not possible? Is it more possible that he declines than Trout or Harper? Talk about poor comparisons.