Re: Iglesias to Start for Game 6
posted at 10/19/2013 2:06 PM EDT
In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:
In response to royf19's comment:
In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:
We have seen rival teams like Baltimore (Ripken) and NY (Jeter) with superstars at this position, yet since the dyas of Petrocelli and Burleson, we have failed to even have a steady player at SS for more than one year, or in the case of Orlando Cabrera, even less.
A little overstated because of Nomar. Out of curiosity, I looked up to see who started at SS for the Sox for at least two years since Petrocelli's first year. No point one way or another, just curious.
However, I'm not sure what your point is. You mention two teams that developed HOF SS during the past quarter century or so. How many other teams have done that? So what's the big deal? And Baltimore didn't win anything with Ripken, while the Sox won two W.S.
Here's the list:
6 -- Garciaparra (would have been seven had it not been for the wrist injury, and it also doesn't include 2004, another year he missed time with injuries then was traded so it could have been eight.
6 -- Petrocelli
6 -- Burleson
4 -- Valentin
4 -- Rivera
3 -- Hoffman
2 -- Gutierrez
2 -- Lugo
2 -- Scutaro
Yes. you have a very, very valid point.
But, I am one of those people who believes shortstop is a position that shouldn't be a revolving door for so many years.
At some point even the most incompetent of GMs has to accidently get a player at this important position that stays in the organization for more than a year or two.
The position was a revolving door for years between Burleson and Nomar. After Nomar the revolving door seems to have spun even faster.
By the way, you forgot Renteria. Possibly the most talented SS since Nomar that was shoved out the door rather quickly.
With Iglesias , I was looking forward to a player who could add stability to an unstable position , maybe not an offensive force, but at least from a defensive standpoint. While Drew gives us a capable player, he's not young enough to be a starting SS for too many more seasons, Bogaerts doesn't strike me as a player who will be smooth enough to play SS at the MLB level as a starter. Peavy's a player for now, he doesn't figure into future plans. 5 years after Peavy retires , Iglesias will still be in his prime.
But, this could all be senseless banter. Because , in this day and age in MLB , there is always a team looking to move a player for one reason or another.....not all these guys are bums, and you can fill the position by trade or by free agency. Even the small market teams remake their lineups year to year, I suppose I am looking for stability in an unstable industry.
About Renteria -- I just listed players with more than one year. If I included "one-year wonders" you could add Gonzalez, Owen, Renteria, Romero, Guerrero. Forgot to include Aparicio, who started for three yers.
There has been an ebb and flow so to speak. There was some instability after Burleson left, but some of it was bad luck too. For instance, Tim Naehring was supposed to be the SS for a number of years but he kept getting injured as I recall. Then Valentin came along, which moved Naehring out of SS. Valentin would have lasted longer if it weren't for Nomar. After Nomar left, the revolving door returned.
We'll see if Bogaerts can give stability for at least four years (or more). We'll also see what Iggy does in Detroit. If Iggy doesn't continue to develop as a hitter, he might end up being a UT player.
The revolving door of the past decade, to me, was less of an issue than in the 1980s because A) the Sox won two W.S. and B) the Sox for the most part had decent players in there. The 1980s saw players like Hoffman, Romero and Spike Owen.
But, this could all be senseless banter.
Naahh. This is a much more interesting discussion than the same old discussions about Drew, Iggy and the trade that keep popping up.