Re: JD Drew
posted at 6/21/2011 6:49 PM EDT
In Response to Re: JD Drew
[QUOTE]I love to bash JD just to hear the ridiculousness of his supporters when they defend him. He will go down as one of the worst Red Sox free agent signings in history. Well, at least you're going to be fair and balanced about J.D. Drew. Nope. No bias here. First of all, let's remember that he is making basically close to A Rod money. They've been paying him $14 million per year for 5 years now. It was a huge contract at the time, and his $14 million this year is still waaaaaaay more than our real players are getting payed, other than a few. Drew isn't making anything close to A-Rod money; unless by A-Rod, you mean Andy Roddick, and then you might be right. A-Rod is making $31M this season, which is more than twice what Drew is making. Nice job. Math is clearly your strong suit. Secondly, he plays right field. Only first base is less demanding and I know he plays half his games at Fenway. Still, only first base is less demanding. While this is true in most cases, right field at Fenway is significantly more difficult than left field. RF at Fenway is so expansive that it covers nearly as much ground as CF in most other stadiums. The fact that Drew has been so proficient defensively over the course of his contract is a testament to his defensive abilities. Thirdly and most importantly, this man absolutely cannot drive in runs. He comes up with more guys on base than just about anybody, and HE"S NEVER DRIVEN IN 69 RUNS FOR US. This is a rather big deal. He was touted, and still is amazingly, as a run producer, and yet he is currently averaging an RBI for every ten ABs. Think about that. For every ten of JD's ABs he gives us 1 RBI. Varitek is a catcher and he gives us about 1.5 RBI per 10 ABs. Salty is the same way, and has more RBIs in fact with less ABs. They usually bat last and they are not having good years, and they STILL are better than our $14 million right fielder at driving in runs. A couple of things. One, why is driving in 69 runs significant? Oh, because the most he's ever driven in is 68 for the Red Sox. I like to call that an artificial boundary. Two, the Red Sox organization doesn't think about run production. Instead, it thinks about run creation. Run production assumes that the most important act is driving in a run. Run creation, on the other hand, puts greater emphasis at getting on base, which Drew has historically done well. Hitting with RISP is not a skill. Hitting, in general is a skill. Drawing walks is a skill. Hitting for power is a skill. Clutch hitting (with RISP) is a matter of luck and opportunity. Nobody in baseball is worse at getting a run in from 3rd with less than 2 outs than JD. He approaches these ABs the same way he does if he leads off the 9th in a one run game. So he watches third strikes and falls behind in the count, pops the ball up to the infield, or whatever else he has to do in order to keep from getting that run in from third. My friends and I laugh about it. We text each other when he comes up in those situations and just shake our heads in amazement as he watches yet another third strike go by. He cannot drive in runs. Is that a fact or an opinion? I'd like to see the data to back it up. Big waste of money. That's your opinion. I'm not going to tell you he's been everything I'd hoped for and more. That said, I've looked beyond his deficiencies (which all players have) to find the positives. Using Fangraphs WAR method to determine player value, Drew (through 2010) has provided nearly as much productive value as he's made in salary. Considering his age (mid-30s), that's pretty good. You see it differently, and that's cool. If you want to live in an archaic, anti-intellectual world where irrational thought is championed and stats like RBIs, wins, and fielding percentage is cherished, go right ahead. I appreciate living in the real world where such obviously biased and illogical arguments are ignored.
Posted by redsoxfan791[/QUOTE]
I agree with you in principle, and I usually like the arguments you make and the supportive information you provide. I do take issue with one consistent aspect of your posts, though. Why is it necessary to personally deride the posters you disagree with? You make a well-stated argument backed with good data only to ruin your post (at least, for me) with insults. Even if your 'opponent' is a jerk, why step down to that level? How does that make your opinion better than his?
While your "Math is clearly your strong suit" could be considered playful sarcasm, I feel you cross the line with statements such as those at the end of your post. First, you state, "You see it differently, and that's cool." You could easily have ended there and had a strong post.
However, for some reason I don't understand, you feel the need to add, "If you want to live in an archaic, anti-intellectual world where irrational thought is championed and stats like RBIs, wins, and fielding percentage is cherished, go right ahead. I appreciate living in the real world where such obviously biased and illogical arguments are ignored."
Comments like those are the reason I have not bothered to check out your blogs. You seem to be a reasonably talented writer, but good writers stand on the strengths of their writing. Venom is an unnecessarry addition. IMHO, it doesn't become you.