Sammy Sofa

Sliding into a base is not necessary. So, can you actually explain this, or are you just taking the broad "nothing in the game is actually necessary" stance? Within the realm of what's necessary, there's no discernable difference between sliding and diving/leaping. A guy can stand up and be tagged out at a base just as easily as he can pull up and play a sinking liner on a bounce. You're beyond ridiculous at this point. The likelihood of sliding working out balance out the risk. Laying out to make a catch is such a long shot that the odds of things going wrong (injury, turning a single into a double or more, etc.) are way too high when compared to the likelihood of making the play.

Finally you're seeing the fallacy in all of this. Yes, your perspective is completely flawed.

Sliding into a base is not necessary. So, can you actually explain this, or are you just taking the broad "nothing in the game is actually necessary" stance?

Guys, what about the pitcher? They're directly in the line of fire if the batter hits a ball up the middle. Should the pitcher just pitch the ball and then dive behind the mound for cover? Lots of risk involved in pitching, y'know!

You do realize that nobody is saying or has said that players shouldn't ever be exposed to situations that could hurt them, right? You DO understand the difference between inherent risk (sliding into bases) and unnecessary risk (laying out/leaping for a catch), yes?

Oh, come on. That's a reach even for you. Nobody here honestly thinks you can't see the difference between making a typical catch and diving/leaping to make catches where the chances of injury/screwing up are drastically increased.

Because those are essential parts of the game. Flinging out in a dive for a catch isn't. Ideally nobody would have to explain to this to you.

They very easily could.

I mean, it's a good quote, but why should we accept it as true? Just because he's Joe DiMaggio? Of course he's going to say something like that. If pressed Soriano would say he's "giving it his all" or something similar.

I'd like to see someone come up with a number of the number of doubles that Soriano turned into singles with his loafing. If it's such a problem I'll bet it's a lot. And he hopped for the same reason he isn't diving all over the OF and leaping into walls; he's not a strong defender at any position, and sure as hell isn't an OF. Some guys can just get bounced around from position to position and succeed. Others can't. The hop was something that he claimed helped settle him down and improve his timing out there. And I'm sorry, but why do you buy the DiMaggio quote like it's some kind of fact? Because the guy says he played hard and hustled every single time it means he did? How is that not the usual [expletive] we hear from almost every single coach and athlete in the history of professional sports?

They have "options" if you're talking about open OF spots. Fukudome is gone after this season and Byrd is gone after the next (if he's not traded before in the offseason). Dumping Soriano because people are "tired of hearing about him" or to "make room" is ridiculous. If there's a deal to be had where the Cubs get some kind of return, fine, but if they're dumping him just to dump him it's dumb. Milk what you can out of him and then just bench him or kick him to the curb when he's useless.

ARAM buys into this philosophy, it seems to fit others on the team. And the Cubs would be a much, much better team if they players as naturally good as Aramis instead of ones that have to grit and hustle to maximize what relatively little value they have. Yay for False Choices! It's not a false choice. Guys who have to play balls out and "110%" every damn time they go out there are, one: going to be much worse baseball players than the ones that don't have to, and two: tend to not be regular players because if they were they would get hurt even more often than they do largely due to their "hustle." I mean, the "false choice" in all of this is the idea that professional athletes like Soriano and Aramis are in any way "lazy" like the mouth-breathers who accuse them of being think they are. They might not go [expletive] nuts with the effort like someone who isn't very good at baseball like Reed Johnson or Tony Campana, but that's because they're so much more valuable and they don't want to hurt themselves and possibly shorten or end their career placating the meatballs who think someone not sprinting out an obvious ground-out or diving for any ball they have .0000001% of catching that comes in their direction is somehow "lazy." It's especially ridiculous when you look at guys like Aramis and Ramirez, who fat humps love to call "lazy," also get raked over the coals by the same piles of waste for being "injured too often." Which is it? Do you want the guy being productive on the field or do you want him giving him more "effort" (which is completely subjective and not quantifiable at all)?

ARAM buys into this philosophy, it seems to fit others on the team. And the Cubs would be a much, much better team if they players as naturally good as Aramis instead of ones that have to grit and hustle to maximize what relatively little value they have.

Reed Johnson has to play to his limits because he's a much worse player. He's effectively destroying himself because he's not as at baseball to keep his job.

Yikes. The Kool-Aid stand is open early this year. SOMEBODY TAKE THE SHOT.

Why, so he can ruin someone else's career over a [expletive] ASG?

"Going all out" too often leads to stupid mistakes, botched plays and unnecessary injuries. It has its place, but by no means should players be going "all out" every single time they make a play.

Soriano didn't lose it in the sun, it was night time, I was there, it was pathetic. (wait, sorry, was thinking of other game, it was sun) And no, you are still wrong about the irony. People are defending Castro against HIS MANAGERS IDIOTIC ATTACKS in a game they were blown out in during a lost season while explicitly defending the veterans. There is absolutely no comparison to fans getting pissed at a player who made a terrible play that lost the game during a pennant race. There's plenty of comparison. As it's been correctly pointed out, sometimes fielders just lose the ball in the sun and there's nothing that they can do about it. I understand why people were pissed when Soriano couldn't see the ball in 2008, but the response from much of the fanbase was well beyond the pale even with the pennant race circumstances. In both cases neither player deserved or deserves to be ripped apart, be it by fans, the press or their managers over those particular plays.

Actually you are noticing an irony that doesn't exist. People are blasting Quade for his idiotic statements, not defending Castro. The problem is Quade would never do the same thing to a person like Soriano but he has repeatedly called out Castro. Soriano isn't perfectly capable. He's not as bad as some paint him, but he's a problem. If he could hit you could easily ignore that problem, but he hasn't hit worth a crap either. No, he really is a capable fielder. And yes, it is ironic because you have had people here in this thread (rightly) defend Castro in the face of Quade's dumb comments: sometimes fielders do just lose the ball in the sun. Yet you had people here at the time of Soriano's mishap that were flipping out and complaining the Lou didn't yank him from the game or call him out for it or bench him.

Johnson isn't much better. Fielders "laying out" really doesn't impress me.

No, he's really not. He makes some moronic mistakes from time to time (the irony of people defending Castro so passionately yet seemingly wanting Soriano executed after the same thing happened to him in Pittsburgh a few seasons back is hilarious), but all in all he's a perfectly capable LF.

"Complete lack of ability in LF?" FTH?

He's not a bad fielder, and going on the DL isn't automatically a dealbreaker. That can mean he has just 1 or 2 15-day DL stints.

Wait, really? I don't remember that at all being like Aramis this year. Aramis was pretty decent from the start, but just wasn't hitting for much power until about a couple months into the season. Lee was completely wretched in April and then went nuts after that for the rest of the season.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_8kbwGHaBDWY/SefwNM9Sy_I/AAAAAAAABiE/_p9xs_fmmwM/s400/vlcsnap-345156.png