2007-08 Baseball Offseason

[Young Drachma]

The Angels won a World Series less than a decade ago. They've established a brand and have marketed heavily in the region. It's something they've never consciously done, coupled with the success that makes them a team you can take serious.

All of that, plus a deep pocketed owner who isn't afraid to spend...means that they're where they are now.

After all, they do play in the 2nd largest metro in the country..so it's not as if there was a real explanation for how bad they were, save for the fact that they were very little brother in an area with a dominant brand.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I ask this with all honesty: were there a lot of profits to pocket? Baseball was in quite a bit worse shape 10 years ago financially and that would have been before the Angels renovated the ballpark. The revenue streams just weren't as big then.

SI

Good point. I just never seen the Angels in the ranks of the Red Sox, Yankees, Mets and Cubs in spending ability. I know your in a big market with the Dodgers, but they just seem to be second-fiddle in an extremely competitive entertainment market. Winning the series and a continue run of success does give the team a quality brand.

[Hammer755]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I think Torii's asking price was insanely high but someone was going to pay it. I think saying he'll be league average at age 34 might be a bit of overkill as players with speed do age a little better tho he's only had 2 years well above league average.

As a sidebar- that reminds me of the type of "glass is half empty" hyperbole that abounds with the extreme sabermetric crowd. It's like talking to band snobs- anyone who is good is going to badly regress and the only players with any sort of upside are nobodys who never get a shot and probably never will and there's a reason (see players like Calvin Pickering).

SI

You said it yourself, though. He's little more than league-average offensively right now. And his defense is already significantly worse than it was just a couple of years ago. A lot of his value is on the defensive side, which players tend to lose much more uniformly than offense.

I wasn't implying that he would implode offensively, just that he was never really that good of a hitter to begin with, so when his defense goes he won't be worth anywhere near $18 mil per year. I agree that a lot of time the first thing that people say is that a hitter regress as soon as he hits age X, but more players now perform in their late thirties than ever before - but that's at the plate. Defense, particularly center field defense, goes much quicker.

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by Hammer755

You said it yourself, though. He's little more than league-average offensively right now. And his defense is already significantly worse than it was just a couple of years ago. A lot of his value is on the defensive side, which players tend to lose much more uniformly than offense.

I wasn't implying that he would implode offensively, just that he was never really that good of a hitter to begin with, so when his defense goes he won't be worth anywhere near $18 mil per year. I agree that a lot of time the first thing that people say is that a hitter regress as soon as he hits age X, but more players now perform in their late thirties than ever before - but that's at the plate. Defense, particularly center field defense, goes much quicker.

All hail Devon White!

[dawgfan]

Hunter is still a pretty good player. He's not the elite CF he used to be, but changing from the Metrodome to Angel Stadium's natural turf should help him. Might reduce his time on the DL too. I don't know that I'd give him 5 years at $90M, but as Atocep points out, revenue is incredibly high in MLB right now and salary inflation is in full bloom. Wouldn't surprise me if advance metrics show his signing makes sense, though I'd be a bit scared of the last couple years of that contract...

[MrBug708]

I see you Cordero to Cinci for a lot of money

[Crapshoot]

Wow, who knew Ed Wade was running the Reds as well?

On the one hand, its an awful overpayment, but on the other hand, its worth noting that baseball revenues have basically doubled in the last couple of years - at some point, we need to adjust our mental price points. I think the Reds might have been better off putting this money towards resigning Dunn (so help me if they complain about this next year). Cordero from last year is a pretty top-notch closer.

[MrBug708]

If you look at the money the closers are getting, it's within reason

[sterlingice]

Except that he doesn't have sustained performance. This was his first good year. That said, someone was going to pay him in that range.

SI

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Except that he doesn't have sustained performance. This was his first good year. That said, someone was going to pay him in that range.

SI

Huh? We're talking about Francisco Cordero, right? He of the three of the last four seasons has 30 or more saves? He whom has never had greater than a 4.00 ERA since his first full season in 2000, in a career spent mostly in playing in Arlington's Boombox park? He has averaged more than a K an inning since 2003, and has held opponents to less than .250 every year as well.

This was hardly his "first good year". Either that, or you have incredibly high standards for your closer.

[cougarfreak]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Huh? We're talking about Francisco Cordero, right? He of the three of the last four seasons has 30 or more saves? He whom has never had greater than a 4.00 ERA since his first full season in 2000, in a career spent mostly in playing in Arlington's Boombox park? He has averaged more than a K an inning since 2003, and has held opponents to less than .250 every year as well.

This was hardly his "first good year". Either that, or you have incredibly high standards for your closer.

I was thinking the same thing. And Cordero gives their bullpen legitimacy. If you follow the Reds, you know the bullpen was downright horrific last year. Bump every pitcher down a role, and it gets considerably better. This makes the Reds 7-8 wins better at least IMO.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by cougarfreak

I was thinking the same thing. And Cordero gives their bullpen legitimacy. If you follow the Reds, you know the bullpen was downright horrific last year. Bump every pitcher down a role, and it gets considerably better. This makes the Reds 7-8 wins better at least IMO.

We saw that last year in KC when Dotel came back and was the closer. Sure, he wasn't a great closer but bumping everyone back 1 space into a role they were better comfortable with was absolutely huge. The lights out bullpen for the couple of months until the trade deadline was the primary reason the Royals played .500 ball during that stretch.

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Huh? We're talking about Francisco Cordero, right? He of the three of the last four seasons has 30 or more saves? He whom has never had greater than a 4.00 ERA since his first full season in 2000, in a career spent mostly in playing in Arlington's Boombox park? He has averaged more than a K an inning since 2003, and has held opponents to less than .250 every year as well.

This was hardly his "first good year". Either that, or you have incredibly high standards for your closer.

Well, a couple of clarifications and time to revisit this now that I've looked closer at Cordero's numbers. More or less, I was wrong and hadn't looked that closely at him before so my bad:

1) I think that's "elite" closer money- the established guys who have had more than 1 excellent year. He had one of those years last year but it was the anomaly not norm. And this isn't delving too far into crazy stathead territory. His ERA this past year was his median ERA for his last 5 years so that's a good sign. But his WHIP for the previous 4 years had been nearly identical, around 1.30, until this year when he went 1.10 and that sticks out like a sore thumb to me.

2) That said, after looking closer at his stats- I think I've been overly harsh on him. He actually has had some good long term success that I was undervaluing. His K rate has remained almost constant and his walks and HR rate have only fluctuated a little but both have remained very good. Frankly, I didn't realize how good he is.

3) If you're Cincy, you're in the same boat as KC. You have to overpay for your players so you'd better choose wisely. Unlike a larger market guy who thinks overpaying for any player is silly when that's all they do and then condemn the smaller market teams for not plowing all of their contract money into the magical "development" budget so they can somehow compete with $100M budgets with insane seasons by young arby players and how that never actually work--- never mind, I'm getting way off track. But, to make a long story short, if you badly needed bullpen help, 4/46 for Cordero actually looks like a pretty good deal. Then again, I also thought Jason Schmidt's contract was the best last winter and we all saw how that turned out...

SI

[JonInMiddleGA]

http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sp...aves_1127.html

It's a familiar refrain, this time from south of the border: Mike Hampton is hurt again.

The Braves left-hander injured his right hamstring in the first inning of his first start in the Mexican Winter League last week. He left after one inning, and it's uncertain if he'll pitch again this winter.

"We don't know when he'll come back [in winter ball], if at all," Braves general manager Frank Wren said. "There's only four weeks left in the season, and hamstring injuries usually take a while."

Hampton, 35, has missed the past two seasons recovering from elbow surgeries on his pitching arm, and the Braves hoped he could make seven starts in Mexico to better gauge the likelihood of having him back in Atlanta's starting rotation for the 2008 season.

But the injury in Thursday's start for Navojoa was another reminder of why the Braves say they aren't counting on Hampton — not like they were counting on him a year ago at this time.

"We're cautiously optimistic that Mike can bounce back and be a starter," Wren said. "But it's simple as this: there's no guarantees."

The Braves don't plan to pursue another starter this winter. They say that even without Hampton, they'd have seven other pitchers vying for their five-man rotation.

John Smoltz, Tim Hudson and Tom Glavine are penciled in at the top. Hampton will have the fourth spot if healthy, and incumbent Chuck James would have competition for the fifth spot from rookies Jo-Jo Reyes and Jair Jurrjens and September surprise Jeff Bennett.

Hampton hurt his right hamstring when he came off the mound to make a play near the end of the first inning Thursday. He tried to keep his leg loose and come back for a second inning, but the pain worsened in warm-ups before the inning, and he left the game.

Wren said Hampton called him Friday and told him the bad news, and the GM was informed by trainers that the muscle had "bled out," usually a sign of something more than a mild strain.

Hampton is owed $15 million in 2008, the final season of an eight-year, $121 million contract he signed with Colorado. He was traded to Atlanta after the 2002 season in a three-way deal with Florida.

The Braves were responsible for $48.5 million of his salary during 2003-08, but insurance covered part of it the past two seasons. Wren said insurance would pay part of it again if Hampton is DL'd in 2008.

The Braves have never disclosed how much of Hampton's salary has been covered by insurance while on the disabled list; the amount was believed to be between 40-60 percent on a prorated basis.

Hampton has had eight stints on the disabled list since being traded to the Braves after the 2002 season. He hasn't pitched in a game stateside since 2005, when he was 5-3 with a 3.50 ERA in 12 starts before blowing out his elbow and having Tommy John ligament-transplant surgery.

[Neuqua]

Kerry Wood turned down multi-year offers from other teams to return to the Cubs on a 4.2mil/1 year deal.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sp...aves_1127.html

It's a familiar refrain, this time from south of the border: Mike Hampton is hurt again.

I've heard some rumblings that the Braves really want Ben Sheets. Their public stance seems to contradict this (after signing Glavine). But yeah, anybody relying on Mike Hampton ought to be looking at pitching.

FWIW, the rumor I heard (which wasn't published, but from a fairly reliable source) had Sheets and Bill Hall plus a prospect to the Braves for Jeff Francouer, Kelly Johnson, and Rafael Soriano.

We'll see if this picks up any legs, as I heard it over a week ago but also heard that it wouldn't be happening before the winter meetings.

Then again, most deals end up coming from out of left field that I haven't heard a thing about.

[miami_fan]

I meant to post this yesterday. Here are the names. The first timers have an astrisk next to them. Yes the use of the astrisk was intentional

Brady Anderson*
Harold Baines
Rod Beck*
Bert Blyleven
Dave Concepcion
Andre Dawson
Shawon Dunston*
Chuck Finley*
Travis Fryman*
Rich "Goose" Gossage
Tommy John
David Justice*
Chuck Knoblauch*
Don Mattingly
Mark McGwire
Jack Morris
Dale Murphy
Robb Nen*
Dave Parker
Tim Raines*
Jim Rice
Jose Rijo*
Lee Smith
Todd Stottlemyre*
Alan Trammell

This has to be the year for guys like Dawson, Blyleven, Rice, Murphy, Gossage etc. make it in if they are getting in at all.

[MikeVic]

I don't see any of the new guys getting in easily!

[korme]

Come on Davey!

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

I don't see any of the new guys getting in easily!

I think Tim Raines has a good shot of easily passing the bar.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Huh? We're talking about Francisco Cordero, right? He of the three of the last four seasons has 30 or more saves? He whom has never had greater than a 4.00 ERA since his first full season in 2000, in a career spent mostly in playing in Arlington's Boombox park? He has averaged more than a K an inning since 2003, and has held opponents to less than .250 every year as well.

This was hardly his "first good year". Either that, or you have incredibly high standards for your closer.

Cordero is 32 though. That scares me a bit. But this could be a big piece of the puzzle if many of our other bullpen guys can stay healthy.

Originally Posted by Shorty3281

Come on Davey!

Concepcion has never come close to getting the votes needed to get in. No reason to think he will this year. Unfortunate, too. I nearly cried during his number retirement ceremony at GABP last year. Awesome, humble guy.

[larrymcg421]

Come on Murphy!

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I think Tim Raines has a good shot of easily passing the bar.

He has the SB, but nothing else really stands out?

[korme]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

Cordero is 32 though. That scares me a bit. But this could be a big piece of the puzzle if many of our other bullpen guys can stay healthy.



Concepcion has never come close to getting the votes needed to get in. No reason to think he will this year. Unfortunate, too. I nearly cried during his number retirement ceremony at GABP last year. Awesome, humble guy.

Oh I'm well aware. Just showing my support. Also, I guess it's a bit more realistic to say "come on Davey!" than "Come on Jose!"

Also, since I haven't chimed in yet, I about jumped out of my seat when we signed Francisco Cordero. I don't care about the salary, we have not had a good closer since Jeff Shaw (that's a stretch), this was the Reds BIGGEST need. I like it. We'll see how he does in GABP!

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

He has the SB, but nothing else really stands out?

Well, he does have the vast number of SBs (5th all time) and a pretty good bat as well. A career OPS+ of 123. Had above average range in the outfield as well.

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Well, he does have the vast number of SBs (5th all time) and a pretty good bat as well. A career OPS+ of 123. Had above average range in the outfield as well.

So you can argue that he could make it in, but I don't think it'll be easily. I could say he would have the easiest time of the new additions though. Really, no one stands out from the rest unless I'm missing something?

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Come on Murphy!

Ditto here.. I understand fully that his career prime was shorter than most considered for the Hall of Fame, and it was tragic to me when one day he suddenly couldn't hit a low outside pitch anymore...

but growing up as a kid, there was only one other player I watched regularly that compared to Murphy at that time (Andre Dawson). Since before cable, the only time we saw American League teams was the occasional NBC game of the week..

Dale Murphy was everything that was right about baseball back in the 80s.. Unfortunately the hall of fame isn't about good guys getting in, which is why Bonds has a better shot than Murphy.. For 2-3 years though, there was no one better in baseball than Murphy.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

He has the SB, but nothing else really stands out?

You're kidding right? Tim Raines had aa 123 OPS+ (and he was very OBP heavy), stole bases at a great clip, and played outstanding defense. Raines would be in the HOF if it was half its current size.

[Alan T]

If you put Tim Raines in, you really have little excuse to not put in Murphy, Dawson, Parker, etc.. They are all pretty comparible.

Out of the list, I think the most deserving is probably Jim Rice or Bert Blyleven and both would be borderline for me.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

He has the SB, but nothing else really stands out?

Tim Raines should easily get in (though I doubt he will). He had an OBP of .385 as a leadoff hitter, 808 stolen bases with 86% success, 3 times in the top 10 in MVP voting, over 3,000 secondary bases, and a career OPS+ of 123 (remember, this is a leadoff hitter's OPS+, its pretty close to Rickey Henderson's).

Raines' case isn't in numbers that jump out at you (aside from stolen bases). You have to take into consideration all the things he did. He was one of the best in baseball at getting on base, he stole bases at a very good success rate, and he hit for what was then amazing power for a leadoff guy. Unfortunately, he played at the same time as Rickey Henderson so instead of being known as the best leadoff hitter in an era, he's forgotten as the 2nd best.

Tim Raines is the Hall of Fame version of Kenny Lofton.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Tim Raines is the Hall of Fame version of Kenny Lofton.

Bingo - I wish I had put it like that.

[MikeVic]

But do voters look at all the little things?

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Bingo - I wish I had put it like that.

I don't honestly think that is fair to Raines.. I think Raines was a better player than Lofton by a bit. I see Lofton as a nice player but not HoF calibre, I think it is entirely fair to consider Raines..

Bottom line for me though is that we have an issue where the "great" hitters of my childhood came about during a period where the offensive numbers were deflated. So when we compare these players to the current era, they all look poor in comparison..

I don't necessarily think that is fair.. I think players like Raines, Dawson, Murphy, etc were all the best players of that era.. isn't that what the HoF is for? I don't think you can fairly say Raines gets in though and make a case against Dawson or Murphy though.

And I still think Rice is more deserving than Raines.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

But do voters look at all the little things?

hell no. look at some of these guys.

[MikeVic]

I can't make comparisons like that, since I wasn't around or paying much attention when these players were doing good. So I can only look at stats for myself.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I don't honestly think that is fair to Raines.. I think Raines was a better player than Lofton by a bit. I see Lofton as a nice player but not HoF calibre, I think it is entirely fair to consider Raines..

Bottom line for me though is that we have an issue where the "great" hitters of my childhood came about during a period where the offensive numbers were deflated. So when we compare these players to the current era, they all look poor in comparison..

I don't necessarily think that is fair.. I think players like Raines, Dawson, Murphy, etc were all the best players of that era.. isn't that what the HoF is for? I don't think you can fairly say Raines gets in though and make a case against Dawson or Murphy though.

And I still think Rice is more deserving than Raines.

A measure like OPS+ or ERA+ measures them against their peers, rendering your complaint moot. Rice was nowhere near the player Raines was - I don't think its even close.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

A measure like OPS+ or ERA+ measures them against their peers, rendering your complaint moot. Rice was nowhere near the player Raines was - I don't think its even close.

Maybe I am misunderstanding OPS+ then. I thought Rice's 128 OPS+ for his career average was better than Raines 123 OPS+ for his career's average...

But part of what I am saying isn't just about the numbers.. I understand this is baseball.. numbers is a big part of why people are hall of famers.. but part of what I am saying is how can the players who were the best of their era like a Dawson, Murphy, Raines, etc.. not be hall of famers? Who for that stretch of time was a better hitter?

I actually woulud love if someone had a list of hitters ranked by their OPS+ for 1983-1987.. I just don't remember many other hitters in their class.. Mike Schmidt, and a few others, but that was it.

[Alan T]

Just for fun, i looked it up while on a conf call.. Adj OPS+ leaders for the NL for the mid part of the 80s (up till 1987 when the ball became wonky)

1983: Schmidt, Guerrero, Evans, Murphy, Cruz
1984: Schmidt, Murphy, Davis, Cruz, Hernandez
1985: Guerrero, Murphy, Raines, Clark, Parker
1986: Schmidt, Raines, Hernandez, Strawberry, McReynolds
1987: Clark, Strawberry, Gwynn, Murphy, Davis

So yeah, other than Mike Schmidt, I think its hard to make a case for a better NL player over that span than Murphy overalll, including Raines.

[miked]

Originally Posted by lungs

I've heard some rumblings that the Braves really want Ben Sheets. Their public stance seems to contradict this (after signing Glavine). But yeah, anybody relying on Mike Hampton ought to be looking at pitching.

FWIW, the rumor I heard (which wasn't published, but from a fairly reliable source) had Sheets and Bill Hall plus a prospect to the Braves for Jeff Francouer, Kelly Johnson, and Rafael Soriano.

We'll see if this picks up any legs, as I heard it over a week ago but also heard that it wouldn't be happening before the winter meetings.

Then again, most deals end up coming from out of left field that I haven't heard a thing about.

That would be a silly trade for the Braves to make. Even with their crappy staff, it's still considered about average for the NL Least. To deal a fan favorite like Francouer and 2 promising youngsters in Johnson and Soriano for a starter who also has injury concerns would be a step back. At any given Braves games, about 40% of the fans are wearing Francouer jerseys, it's tough to deal a guy like that, even if he K's a ton.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Just for fun, i looked it up while on a conf call.. Adj OPS+ leaders for the NL for the mid part of the 80s (up till 1987 when the ball became wonky)

1983: Schmidt, Guerrero, Evans, Murphy, Cruz
1984: Schmidt, Murphy, Davis, Cruz, Hernandez
1985: Guerrero, Murphy, Raines, Clark, Parker
1986: Schmidt, Raines, Hernandez, Strawberry, McReynolds
1987: Clark, Strawberry, Gwynn, Murphy, Davis

So yeah, other than Mike Schmidt, I think its hard to make a case for a better NL player over that span than Murphy overalll, including Raines.

The thing that kills Murphy is his rapid decline. He had a HoF peak, but didn't have anywhere near the longevity that Raines had (Raines was productive until he retired at 41). Murphy's run was really from '79-'87 and even then he had a couple mediocre years in there. Murphy comes down to how much you value peak performance.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by lungs

I've heard some rumblings that the Braves really want Ben Sheets. Their public stance seems to contradict this (after signing Glavine). But yeah, anybody relying on Mike Hampton ought to be looking at pitching.

FWIW, the rumor I heard (which wasn't published, but from a fairly reliable source) had Sheets and Bill Hall plus a prospect to the Braves for Jeff Francouer, Kelly Johnson, and Rafael Soriano.

We'll see if this picks up any legs, as I heard it over a week ago but also heard that it wouldn't be happening before the winter meetings.

Then again, most deals end up coming from out of left field that I haven't heard a thing about.

The hell kind of deal is that? No fucking way is that a good deal for the Braves. We need to improve the staff, but not at the expense of two starters and the presumed closer, not to mention one of them being a huge fan favorite.

[MrBug708]

Jeff Kent is expected in Spring Training for the Dodgers

[lungs]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

The hell kind of deal is that? No fucking way is that a good deal for the Braves. We need to improve the staff, but not at the expense of two starters and the presumed closer, not to mention one of them being a huge fan favorite.

I pretty much agree. Seeing as how I am hearing this from the Brewer side of things, the players mentioned were probably what the Brewers were asking for to start any possible trade discussion. And obviously the Braves wouldn't do that.

I highly doubt anything happens. Sheets probably has more value to the Brewers staying put as it would be pretty hard to get the haul he would've commanded without injury issues. If he's healthy he is pretty darn good but he hasn't been. It wouldn't be realistic to expect anything near what somebody like Dan Haren would command. The only positive thing about Sheets' injuries is that they haven't been catastrophic arm injuries. It's all been some very strange, freak injuries.

Sheets will pitch in Milwaukee next year and leave as a free agent. He'd be too high of a risk for a team like Milwaukee to guarrantee a lot of money and years.

I could see the Braves as suitors for him when he becomes a free agent.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

You're kidding right? Tim Raines had aa 123 OPS+ (and he was very OBP heavy), stole bases at a great clip, and played outstanding defense. Raines would be in the HOF if it was half its current size.

You let Raines in and then you open the door for having a HOF that is twice the size. A lot of similar players to Raines that are not HOFers.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

You let Raines in and then you open the door for having a HOF that is twice the size. A lot of similar players to Raines that are not HOFers.

Such as?

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

You let Raines in and then you open the door for having a HOF that is twice the size. A lot of similar players to Raines that are not HOFers.

No. You're flat out wrong on this. Raines was a slightly poorer version of Rickey Henderson, who is easily one of the top 100 (and probably one of the top 50) baseball players of all time. Even excluding all the awful pre-1900 and cronies in the HOF, Raines is a top notch candidate. He played in a more depressed offensive environment and stole bases at a remarkable 85% clip, meaning he actively generated runs on the basepath.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Such as?

Julio Franco
Alan Trammel
Lou Whitaker
Willie Davis
Barry Larkin
Buddy Bell
Ken Griffey Sr
Bret Butler
Kenny Lofton (one can make a decent argument for him)
Vada Pinson

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

No. You're flat out wrong on this. Raines was a slightly poorer version of Rickey Henderson, who is easily one of the top 100 (and probably one of the top 50) baseball players of all time. Even excluding all the awful pre-1900 and cronies in the HOF, Raines is a top notch candidate. He played in a more depressed offensive environment and stole bases at a remarkable 85% clip, meaning he actively generated runs on the basepath.

No I am not wrong, it is an opinion and a perception, just like your's. For many months now, you have been defending certain players and personalities as if your life and reputation depends upon it. Why is that?

[Atocep]

Julio Franco - didn't steal bases with the regularity or success rate of Raines. OPS+ is 111. Was wildly inconsistent and one of the worst defensive players in modern history.
Alan Trammel - Didn't have on base skills or speed of Raines. Wasn't a leadoff hitter. OPS+ of 110. Still a borderline HoFer because he's a SS.
Lou Whitaker - Wouln't kill me if he got into the hall, but his OPS+ is lower, didn't have the stolen bases, nor the on base skills of Raines.
Willie Davis - .311 career OBP. I'm stopping there.
Barry Larkin - Should be in the hall of fame.
Buddy Bell - 109 OPS+, 55 SB and 79 CS, .341 OBP
Ken Griffey Sr - less power, less on base skills, over 600 less stolen bases.
Bret Butler - Nowhere near the power or the basestealing ability that Raines had. He was what Juan Pierre wishes he is.
Kenny Lofton (one can make a decent argument for him) - Is a poor man's Tim Raines. Very similar players, Tim Raines was just better in all areas.
Vada Pinson - .327 OBP, good power, 500 less stolen bases. Did I mention .327 OBP?

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

No I am not wrong, it is an opinion and a perception, just like your's. For many months now, you have been defending certain players and personalities as if your life and reputation depends upon it. Why is that?

I dislike the "they're all opinions, there's no right or wrong" attitude - its subjectivity when we have objective measures. Those measures can't capture everything and can be supplemented by subjective measures (and they should be), but they paint a lot better picture. I'm at work now, so I don't have access to more advanced numbers on Raines and co (and am thus somewhat guilty of not backing up my own arguement), but we fundementally disagree on the premise.

I