From: djohnson@cayley.waterloo.edu (David Johnson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Value of Stats
Date: 23 Jul 92 15:45:43 GMT
Organization: University of Waterloo

In article <+_gm15c@lynx.unm.edu> kbos@carina.unm.edu (Kurt Bose "of Biscayzee") writes:
>In article <BrsMp9.A19@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> djohnson@cayley.waterloo.edu (David Johnson) writes:
>>In article <qdfm03@lynx.unm.edu> kbos@carina.unm.edu (Kurt Bose "of Biscayzee") writes:
>>>>If Rance Mulliniks, Derek Bell, and Rob Ducey don't think that a .300 hitter
>>>>15HR and 50 RBI man so far shouldn't be playing then they shouldn't be
>>>>considered team players as well.  
>>>>
>>>OK, Dave, at your company, instead of having you make 30 widgets a day, we're
>>>going to pay some guy who makes 40 widgets a day three times as much as you.
>>>I certainly hope you're going to be a team employee about this.  Especially next
>>>year when we cut your salary by 10% because you didn't make any widgets last 
>>>year.  What, you say?  You could have made some widgets last year if we gave you
>>>a chance?  You ungrateful lout.  You're just not a team employee.  
>>
>>Are you trying to imply that any of these players could put up the numbers
>>that Winfield has this year.  Rance Mulliniks, possibly average but not a 
>>chance for 15 HRs in 4 years let alone half a season.  Rob Ducey has no 
>>chance of matching any of these numbers.  Derek Bell is a good player and
>>could possibly put up these types of numbers eventually but he is still a
>>rookie.  I don't think that he could do it this year.  Thus in response to
>>your above question if he was a better worker than me then he deserves to
>>get paid more than me.  You did say that he could amke 40 comared to my 30
>>so I get the idea that he is a better worker.
>>
>Dave, this has nothing to do with baseball here.  And I'm not implying anything
>about anyone.  My question is, how does the fact that you're losing your JOB 
>affect you?  Sure, you can be a team player, and sit down, but when the company 
>sits down next year and inks a contract, it's going to reflect the fact that you
>haven't done s**t for the team this past year, when you know you can do pretty 
>well yourself, thank you very much.  Are you going to be a team player and sit
>down when your boss at Chrysler says he found a foreigner who can do harder 
>work than you, so please don't bother coming to work?  At what point does team
>loyalty come into play when it interferes with your livelyhood?  From the point
>of view of Ducey, Bell, and Mulliniks, why should they bother being team players
>if the team dumps them for an aging vet with another notch on his gun. 
>Question: is the .300, 15, 50 Winfield is giving them worth the 2.5 million more
>they'd save by playing Bell and suffering through, say, .250,6,30 that might
>have been this half-season?  Is it worth the possible harm Ducey's career might
>have suffered by being treated this way?  Now answer these questions from Bell
>and Ducey's point of view.  Same answer?  I didn't think so.

Of course Ducey would like to play and of course Ducey is probably ticked off
at management for not giving him a chance but he never complained or was
disruptive in the Clubhouse.  I praise him for this.  Also Ducey wants to
win like the team does and is and enjoys playing so close to home so maybe
this is why he hasn't complained more.  The same thing goes for Bell and me
in the above example you gave.  It is not being ticked off but it is how
you accept it which makes you a team player or not.

>>>>It is obvious that the team didn't think much of Cecil at that time as they
>>>>let him leave for Japan.
>>>>
>>>Er, huh?  Fielder ASKED to go to Japan, because he was playing behind Bell and
>>>Freddie McGriff, and therefore couldn't play full time.
>>
>>True but do you think that the Jays would have given up on him if they ever
>>thought that he could put up the numbers he is now.  No.  They didn't think 
>>that he was that good so they gave up on him.  As well, 24 other teams
>>didn't think that he was that good since they all thought Detroit was
>>stupid for signing him to a $1 million contract when he returned from Detroit.
>>He would have gotten more than $1 million if anyone thought that he was going
>>to be that good.
>>
>Bull.  Toronto GRANTED Fielder's request.  George Bell would have "weakened the
>team" in the field, right?  So, Fielder has to play 1B, right?  Sorry, David,
>but McGriff is better than Fielder.

The thing is if Toronto thought he could hit 40-50HRs or even 25 HRs they 
would have found a spot for him.  That kind of offense is worth losing a bit
of defense for and it would have made Bell happier as well.  Toronto didn't
think that he was that good and couldn't trade him for anything so the let
him go.  Not just because he asked.

>He was then, he is now.  But we've been 
>through the McGriff issue before.  As for anyone thinking Fielder was going to
>be "that good", why should they?  Remember, we're talking Japan here, land of
>Boomer Wells, Leon Lee, and Ralph Bryant.  Would you pay $1 million for THEM?
>They've all had stats that ripped the tar out of Fielder's .302/38 HR season.
>And part of the problem was Fielder's bulk.  "I didn't even think,...that he
>could catch a ball."-Sparky Anderson.
>
>>>>Even if the Bell to DH move would be a bad one Bell should have respected the
>>>>manager and either agreed to play there part time or privately ask for a 
>>>>trade like some players.  If he had of been a little quieter about him not
>>>>wanting to DH but still privately discuss the issue with management then
>>>>the fans would have never booed him and he may still be in Toronto (Awful
>>>>Thought).
>>>>
>>>>     b)If the management doesn't respect you and doesn't think you
>>>>       are doing a good job, why should he have to respect the management.
>>>
>>>You referred to Winfield here, defending his New York surliness label, but 
>>>apply it with your other quote about Bell, above.  Whoa. Contradiction city.
>>>
>>>Question:  If the management doesn't respect Bell and doesn't think he was doing
>>>a good job, why should George have to respect Jimy Williams?
>>
>>Did I say that the Jays management didn't respect Bell.  They never publically
>>criticized him ar ever spoke bad about him.  They thought he was a great 
>>player but his defense was deteriorating and they wanted him to DH.  If Bell
>>would DH without complaining he would still be here and Winfield wouldn't.
>>
>They didn't respect his defense, that's for sure.  And that defense was MORE
>than worth Sil "Perpetual Prospect" Campusano's offense.
>
>My real beef is with the assertion that G.Bell didn't "respect" Toronto 
>management the way he ought.  And that's unfair.  For every source you can 
>name (and I WANT names) that says Bell was selfish, rude, and a bad apple in the
>clubhouse (as opposed, of course to the Grand Geezer, Dave Winfield), I can name
>a person who gives a glowing report about Bell.  Bell felt he could help the
>team the most in the field, because DHing hurts his value to the team.  The fact
>that he's a fiery person, and shows it, only goes to prove that the world is
>made up of 30 second sound bites on the evening news.

Right.  Bell may have been a great guy but the way he flatly refused to DH is
what ticked off management and the fans and that is why he isn't here now.  I
also remember him showing up late for spring training once or twice.  Do you
think that this helped, hindered or did nothing to the opinions of the
management and other players about him?

>-- 
>*  Kurt Bose (as in * I am NOT the Antichrist, no matter what my future mother
>*  Daisy, not Rose) * in law may think. Nor do I pretend to speak for UNM. Tried
>*kbos@carina.unm.edu* it one time, but they caught me at it. I think they were a
>*  Junior Stathead  * tad miffed at me, sure, but the Dean's hair DID grow back.