MLB 2008-09 Hot Stove League

[Lammycat]

Hey how's the wine?

[Guest Jules]

And Jude's initial contention doesn't matter.

dude

[cryptique]

A first baseman almost never really "ranges" to their right.

This is demonstrably false.

 

It might not necessarily be a more or less difficult position, but it requires substantially more athleticism, and usually a stronger arm. I don't think that's an opinion type of statement, it's a watching baseball statement. I think most people would say that since it requires more athleticism and a better arm, it is more difficult. I would agree with that, but I don't think you have to agree with the fact that it's more difficult to agree that 2nd basemen are almost always more athletic than 1st basemen.

Careful with that word "requires." I would argue that an optimal first baseman is just as athletic as a second baseman (or shortstop, or any other player). The fact that not all first baseman are that athletic reflects calculated gambles on the part of managers, not what sort of athlete is best suited to a position.

 

You're assuming that sticking a lummox at first is a reasonable move. I am not making that assumption. Further, I would suggest that you could stick a John Kruk-sized guy at second and assuming he was competent enough to play first (and right-handed), not lose a whole lot in terms of defense versus that same guy playing first. In other words, if it's a given that you're going to have a guy like that in your infield, I don't think it really matters that much where he plays, so long as he's on the right side and not the left. (If you're going to have two such guys in your infield, sign a bunch of fly-ball pitchers.)

 

The only significant difference in athleticism that comes to mind is turning the double play, and I'm not convinced that double plays alone require "substantially" more athleticism -- but they're probably the reason that a guy like Kruk tends to get stuck at first rather than second. (OK, so Kruk's not a good example -- he's left-handed.)

 

And Jude's initial contention doesn't matter. It's an opinion thing.

It was Jules, and yes it does matter, because it was the genesis of this whole discussion, or rather, his response to your post was.

 

But it is a position that place more of a premium on defense, so a player like Pedroia who can play good defense and hit well has more value than his counterpart at 1B, because that combination of skills at that position is substantially more rare.

I don't agree with this either.

 

But you know what? Arguing baseball with you is one of my least favorite things to do on VC, so I'm going to go back to the RTT where I belong.

[bobbob1313]

Good stuff. Say some stuff and then leave the conversation so you don't have to back it up. That's cool. I don't see any way I'm being douchy here, so what ever.

 

It's not just the glove work. The 2nd baseman has to cover more area and move more than the first baseman. The only guys who are the size of first baseman who can play middle infield are athletic freaks like Ripken, arod, and hanley. And each of them was or will be forced to a different position.

 

The argument can be summed up by two words: lateral quickness. You have to be able to move to both sides of your body very quickly at 2nd, but at first, you only have to really move to your right. Might have to make one dive to your left per game, but that is more reflexes than any athleticism.

[Reni]

You'd never see the likes of Pujols, Konerko, Howard, Lee, Youkilis, Fielder, Morneau, etc pulling something like this off.......

 

 

That is still likely one of the best plays I have ever seen in my long baseball watching life. Gooooch!

[JerseyMike]

2b requires a player to be more athletic, but 1B is a more difficult position. There are so many subtleties to playing first that are taken for granted, like guarding the line, covering foul pops near the stands and dugout, fielding bunts, having a good stretch (very important and very overlooked) and of course, scooping the ball out on bad throws. A good first baseman can make much more of a difference in the game than a second baseman, but most of it is overlooked. Also, the 3-6-3 DP is the hardest to turn in the game.

 

A second baseman, on the other hand, doesn't need a great arm and the glove doesn't need to be great either, since they can make the short throw after knocking the ball down. Ranger, of course, is very important, but there have probably been more 2nd baseman with limited range on good teams in recent years than there has been good teams with shaky first baseman. Just look at the Yankee dynasty teams: Duncan and Knoblauch at 2nd, both shaky fielders, with Martinez at 1st, who had good range and a great glove. The Red Sox have had a few different 2nd baseman (Pedrioa being the rarity) who were mediocre at best, but they had Youkalis, Olerud and Milar at 1st, who were all good gloveman. The Astros and Giants went to the series with Jeff Kent at second, who had limited range as well. This years Phillies may have been an anomoly.

[Lammycat]

1st base is more difficult than 2nd base? I've reserved comment on all of this until now but I think anybody in baseball would dispute this. 2nd base is a physically more demanding position, requires more speed and overall athleticism, better range, a better arm, and better hand-eye coordination. As b2 (or someone) stated earlier, it's a reason there's a premium on guys who can play the spot well. It's also why there are so many 1b-men available that can hold their own.

[CrushOfVeils80]

Being in the show obviously isnt easy, only 750 people get to do it at one time, but that being said second base isnt full of amazing athletes

[MrRain422]

Yeah, I can almost buy Jules's original argument that 2nd base isn't too much harder than 1st base (but not quite). The notion that first base is actually more difficult seems pretty absurd to me though.

[Serak_the_Preparer]

2b requires a player to be more athletic, but 1B is a more difficult position. There are so many subtleties to playing first that are taken for granted, like guarding the line, covering foul pops near the stands and dugout, fielding bunts, having a good stretch (very important and very overlooked) and of course, scooping the ball out on bad throws. A good first baseman can make much more of a difference in the game than a second baseman, but most of it is overlooked. Also, the 3-6-3 DP is the hardest to turn in the game.

 

You played 1st Base in highschool, didn't you? Scooping a ball is not that hard - with the large scoop glove, all it takes is a calculated swipe. I will say that footwork is VERY important for a first baseman, but that can be learned very quickly. The proper footwork includes which foot should be on the bag depending on where the throw is coming from and proper footwork also includes learning a good stretch - all which are relatively easy to learn. Fielding bunts is moot - the pitcher covers alot of the right side of the infield and if the ball does get to the first baseman it is an easy underhand throw - unlike the barehand, off-balance throw from a full on sprint that the third baseman has to make (yes, I played 3rd). Coverling the line falls into the 3rd baseman's realm. The majority of batters are right-handed and their line shots go down the left field line, not the right field line. In addition, the majority of the time the first baseman plays off the bag, giving him much more time to field any grounder coming his way. Although this can also be said for the 2nd baseman, as he often play shallow right. As far as going into the stands - I argue that a second baseman, with their great range make more of those catches down the line near the stands. And the 3-6-3 DP is no harder than the 2-3-2 DP and almost as rare.

[MattZ]

Mussina = HOF?

[MrRain422]

Not if it were up to me.

 

He's similar to some borderline guys who snuck in (Juan Marichal, Jim Bunning) but not as good as several guys who for some reason are still on the outside looking in (can they PLEASE put Bert Blyleven in the Hall already?).

 

I'd say he's just barely not worthy but probably has a semi-decent chance of getting in.

[Guest Jules]

2b requires a player to be more athletic, but 1B is a more difficult position. There are so many subtleties to playing first that are taken for granted, like guarding the line, covering foul pops near the stands and dugout, fielding bunts, having a good stretch (very important and very overlooked) and of course, scooping the ball out on bad throws. A good first baseman can make much more of a difference in the game than a second baseman, but most of it is overlooked. Also, the 3-6-3 DP is the hardest to turn in the game.

 

A second baseman, on the other hand, doesn't need a great arm and the glove doesn't need to be great either, since they can make the short throw after knocking the ball down. Ranger, of course, is very important, but there have probably been more 2nd baseman with limited range on good teams in recent years than there has been good teams with shaky first baseman. Just look at the Yankee dynasty teams: Duncan and Knoblauch at 2nd, both shaky fielders, with Martinez at 1st, who had good range and a great glove. The Red Sox have had a few different 2nd baseman (Pedrioa being the rarity) who were mediocre at best, but they had Youkalis, Olerud and Milar at 1st, who were all good gloveman. The Astros and Giants went to the series with Jeff Kent at second, who had limited range as well. This years Phillies may have been an anomoly.

not really

[Lammycat]

(can they PLEASE put Bert Blyleven in the Hall already?).

I think he's only got 3-4 years of eligibility left, too.

[Duck-Billed Catechist]

I had no idea how nice of a season Mussina had in 2008.

[PigSooie]

I had no idea how nice of a season Mussina had in 2008.

 

Yep. He was a star on my fantasy team. A definite steal.

[Lammycat]

I don't think Mussina will have a problem getting into the HOF at all. Maybe not the first time around, but he'll get in pretty quickly. He pitched his whole career, and pitched above average for most of it, in the AL East, too. That's impressive in itself.

[MrRain422]

I find that I tend to be a lot stingier with the Hall of Fame nods than most people.

[MattZ]

You also have to wonder how the steroids issue factors into the evaluation of pitchers. Since most people seem focused on performance enhancing drugs used by hitters only, you'd think that if hitters stats are inflated, that pitchers stats were deflated. And Moose's stats look pretty great in that context. Like i said, if you assume for purposes of this discussion that the pitchers weren't juicing (and I think they were).

[MrRain422]

Yeah, I think the Clemens revelations did, or at least should have, opened up some eyes about the ways that steroids may have helped pitchers too.

 

Mussina was probably smart to quit now, in terms of Hall of Fame chances. Writers look at wins waaaaay too much, and he managed to eke out his first 20 win season this year. It would have been dumb to leave him out for lack of a 20 win season, and its just as dumb to consider him more qualified now than if he'd ended the year with 19, but the reality is that it will probably make a difference to a lot of the guys who get the vote, and doing it in his final season gives the appearance of going out on top.

[Lammycat]

You also have to wonder how the steroids issue factors into the evaluation of pitchers. Since most people seem focused on performance enhancing drugs used by hitters only, you'd think that if hitters stats are inflated, that pitchers stats were deflated. And Moose's stats look pretty great in that context. Like i said, if you assume for purposes of this discussion that the pitchers weren't juicing (and I think they were).

This is a point I meant to make, too. He pitched quite well and put up impressive numbers in the steroids era, to boot.

[CrushOfVeils80]

Mussina = HOF?

 

 

tough call, the 20 win season in 2008 helps him but it was his only one, he did have three 18 win seasons and two 19 win seasons though, lets say he wins 20 those years that would give him six 20 win seasons and if he had six 20 win seasons he would be a first ballot HOF, tough to leave a guy out of the HOF cuz of only 8 wins especially since he played for some bad teams in his career

 

I have always really liked Mussina so I hope he makes it, he was a great pitcher and probably deserves it but I think he will just miss out, nothing really sets Mussina apart either way, very solid and consistent but no Cy Youngs and no rings really hurts him, I hope Im wrong, if he came back and had two more solid years he would be a shoe in I think cuz he would probably get to 300.......if he gets in guys like Jack Morris, Bert Blyleven, and Lee Smith need to be in cuz they deserve it more

[Sir Stewart]

If he doesn't make the HOF, at least Moose will be in there for his perfect game against the Red Sox.

 

Oh wait - that got broken up with one strike to go. My bad.

[CrushOfVeils80]

If he doesn't make the HOF, at least Moose will be in there for his perfect game against the Red Sox.

 

Oh wait - that got broken up with one strike to go. My bad.

 

 

Carl Everett broke that up right? I do remember that game very well as I was in college and not interested in whatever work I had to do, Mussina was amazing that night

 

how about HOF for....

 

-Pedro Martinez

-Curt Schilling

-Frank Thomas

 

????

[MattZ]

how about HOF for....

 

-Pedro Martinez

-Curt Schilling

-Frank Thomas

 

????

 

yes

yes

yes