K-Town

And the opposite is true. If McGwire doesn't get in on the first ballot, then Sammy and Barry should be the same way. Sammy, McGwire, and Bonds are different players. Mac did things that Sosa didn't do. Bonds did things that Mac did do. Personally, I think that all 3 of them should go, but it should be based on the credentials........ not somebody's assumptions about what they did or didn't do. Although Sosa did get caught cheating, and Bonds is close to being busted, so that should be taken into account.

Wood walks Pujols more than he would a typical batter (6 walks in 34 at-bats), and rightfully so, because Pujols has hit him well (1.057 OPS). Prior is even more careful with Pujols (5 walks in 23 at-bats). Can't blame him, since Pujols has a 1.247 OPS against him. So I wouldn't exactly say that Prior and Wood "go after" Pujols. In fact, those two walk him at a higher rate than the rest of the Cubs' pitching staff.

"Hey, you're a loser." Yea. He's does come off as a prick. Are you serious? Did you read the question that was asked? It was a legitimate question about what he thought about booing, but he focused on the guy's personal opinion at the end. And if you're going to insult the dude, at least be funny like he was with the half-shirt question. Here's what he said about booing: I think it's ok to boo for bad plays. But, when they're booing Izzy just for coming out of the bullpen, I don't think it's right. I personally wouldn't boo the players. And, I think it effects the players and it makes them press.

"Hey, you're a loser." Yea. He's does come off as a prick. Are you serious? Did you read the question that was asked? It was a legitimate question about what he thought about booing, but he focused on the guy's personal opinion at the end. And if you're going to insult the dude, at least be funny like he was with the half-shirt question. I'm not sure what you're referring to, specifically. Someone asked him what he thought of the centerfield fans, because he (the person asking the question) thinks they're losers. Edmonds responding by calling HIM (the person asking the question) a loser. What's wrong with that? Edmodns was basically defending the fans in centerfield at Busch Stadium.

Clearly a lazy reporter. If you want to find the juice on McGwire, then go look for it and show it to us (as San Fran reporters have done with Bonds), instead of just assuming that it's there. If this reporter has something on McGwire, then I'll be happy to listen. Otherwise, McGwire is no more guilty than Tony Gwynn, Mark Grace, Cal Ripken, Roger Clemens, etc. Mac is an easy target. That's what lazy reporters do....... they look for easy targets, and type what people want to hear. Bo-ring. Yeah, Mac's way too easy a target. You know what a sportswriter should do? Write an article accusing Augie Ojeda of steroid use and say they'll never vote for him in the HOF. THEN I'll listen. But Mac's just way too easy a target. I'm not sure what your point is. All this reporter did was write the same thing that's been written a gazillion times, and put his name on it. Big deal. If you want to give him the "Bonds treatment", then do the work and go find something juicy on McGwire, like reporters in San Francisco did with Bonds. If there's something to be found, then go find it. Otherwise, shut up about it. That's the way I feel.

Clearly a lazy reporter. If you want to find the juice on McGwire, then go look for it and show it to us (as San Fran reporters have done with Bonds), instead of just assuming that it's there. If this reporter has something on McGwire, then I'll be happy to listen. Otherwise, McGwire is no more guilty than Tony Gwynn, Mark Grace, Cal Ripken, Roger Clemens, etc. Mac is an easy target. That's what lazy reporters do....... they look for easy targets, and type what people want to hear. Bo-ring.

"Hey, you're a loser." Yea. He's does come off as a prick. Are you serious? Did you read the question that was asked?

That's a good point. Pedro has made HIS mark in the era of "juiced balls & bodies". That speaks volumes for him. I think you have to easily put him at the top of the list.

From an ERA+ perspective, you'd have to put Pedro at the top. RJ and Clemens both fare better than Maddux in ERA+ and strikeout numbers......and their ability to flat-out dominate a game, so I'd put them on the next level. Maddux is probably a notch below (although you have to give him credit for his longevity).

There's nothing wrong with arguing, but it seems like that's all you do here. Mix it up a little. It's harmless fun. A victimless crime. Save your frustration for someone who actually makes personal attacks and doesn't know what he's talking about. :wink:

My reaction to the Pujols "joke" was that it wasn't that funny, or original. Some of you are overreacting to my reaction.

In comparison to Pujols, yes. No, in comparison to himself. "Past his prime", I think, is the term that we're using. You're missing the point. When comparing Ramirez and Rolen, you have to take into effect that Ramirez will likely improve and Rolen will likely plateau or decline because of their ages. The same holds true for Lee and Pujols, even though no one has really compared who will be better going forward(correct answer: Pujols). I don't necessarily buy into the idea of Derrek Lee suddenly declining because of his age. I think he's FOUND his prime. Some find it later than others. That's why this whole discussion of Ramirez' prime versus Rolen's prime is completely arbitrary, in my mind. We don't know when their prime was, is, or will be.

The stuff about Pujols' age was funny back in 2004. Now? I just don't get it. It's not like I attacked someone for saying it........ I just didn't find the humor in it. Relax. It goes both ways. As for being argumentative......... yeah. It's a freakin' baseball message board. Why be "rivals" if we can't argue? It's not personal...... I haven't called anyone names......... haven't insulted anyone. Keep it in context, folks. That's all.

So funny....... and so original. He hits REALLY well for a 46-year old, doesn't he? Got anything new? Do you come here just to argue? Someone else brings up Pujols being 46, and I'M the one that wants to argue? What's the point in saying something like that? If it were original, I might see the humor in it. At this point, it's just stupid.

In comparison to Pujols, yes. No, in comparison to himself. "Past his prime", I think, is the term that we're using.

So funny....... and so original. He hits REALLY well for a 46-year old, doesn't he? Got anything new?

So if you walk a guy and get burned, it's a bad thing. If you walk a guy and don't get burned, it's not a bad thing. Is that some new information?

One more time....... Rolen is a little over 3 years older than Ramirez, NOT 4 years older. If you assume that Rolen's best years are behind him (prime years), then you have to assume the same thing for Derrek Lee. Right?

Me either. Are they underrated, or are they overrated? And doesn't walking guys have something to do with "how you pitch to the lineup"?

There's a discussion about Edmonds and steroids on the "Rivalry" board. At the risk of getting Cub fans worked up (which isn't my intention), could A-ram be just as much of a suspect?

I wouldn't go so far as to say that he's making a fool out of himself. Last time I checked, he was in the top 10 in OBP.

The race is even closer than it appears at first glance. Look at the run differentials: Houston: +15 Chicago: +15 St. Louis: +15 There are alot of directions that the race could go. The Cards have hung in there, even with the bullpen suffering a major melt-down. That will change, in my opinion. The Cubs have hung in there without Prior & Wood, but their replacements are 2-2, so maybe that hasn't been as much of a factor as it could be. Should be fun!

Not so far. Both players are off to great starts, but Pujols currently leads Lee in Runs, Hits, HR, RBI, BB, OBP, SLG & OPS. As far as fielding goes...Pujols has zero errors, Lee has committed two errors (most of any first baseman in the majors). The only major stat Lee leads Pujols in, is BA (Lee's .353 to Pujols' .341) Right now... Pujols > Lee With that said, all of this doesn't mean that much, because both players are tearing it up and aren't that far apart in most of the stats. But see, none of that matters. Lee was better in the numbers than Pujols, and yet Pujols won the MVP. Since Lee's team is ahead of the Cardinals right now, Lee > Pujols. What value is Pujols to the Cardinals if Izzy blows all their games? :wink: Depends which numbers you use. Pujols won the Win Shares category, which is a pretty telling stat. You really fail to comprehend a comment made with tongue planted firmly in cheek. But I do think Lee led in VORP and RC. Win Shares still has a strong link to team performance as it is based on the team's pythagorean standings. I'm just discussing the issue.......... tongue in cheek or not. It's hard to tell with you. If someone calls you on something, then you say "I didn't mean it....... don't you understand anything"? Regardless, I agree that Win Shares is related to team success, but a player's value is also relative to team success, in my opinion (some don't agree on that).

Not so far. Both players are off to great starts, but Pujols currently leads Lee in Runs, Hits, HR, RBI, BB, OBP, SLG & OPS. As far as fielding goes...Pujols has zero errors, Lee has committed two errors (most of any first baseman in the majors). The only major stat Lee leads Pujols in, is BA (Lee's .353 to Pujols' .341) Right now... Pujols > Lee With that said, all of this doesn't mean that much, because both players are tearing it up and aren't that far apart in most of the stats. But see, none of that matters. Lee was better in the numbers than Pujols, and yet Pujols won the MVP. Since Lee's team is ahead of the Cardinals right now, Lee > Pujols. What value is Pujols to the Cardinals if Izzy blows all their games? :wink: Depends which numbers you use. Pujols won the Win Shares category, which is a pretty telling stat.

Ponson > Zambrano. :wink: