quote:

---

I'd rather have a team that is in the post season hunt year after year and making back to bacwant rld Series than be stuck in the cellar like Houston currently is. But hey, that's just me and every other fan, besides you.

---

You're an idiot if you think I'd rather be in the cellar, but good for you on compounding the argument & putting words in mouth.

Go stoke your Arlington Rangers on the Dallas board, you'll have more friends over there. Do you want Gabe's number?

Would you expect anyone on the Houston board to agree with you? I don't think so Tim.

quote:

---

Houston isn't far away from competing. Believe what you want. We were put in a cellar by poor ownership. You of all people should be able to relate

---

last 3 seasons with 167 wins, and a total that has gone down each year disagrees with you.

The rangers had trade/draft pick situations that worked great in their favor. The rules that helped that are no longer in place for Houston. Y'all are at minimum 3 years away from being in any sort of contention for anything besides the cellar of the AL West.

I'm done, arguing with you is exhausting

Cellar.

No bias with this cool guy.

Some $30k dollar millionaires never change.

That is me. Sweet burn! Going to go get in my leased bimmer and drive off a bridge to cope.

T&P bro. Keep it hoodrat

quote:

---

That is me. Sweet burn! Going to go get in my leased bimmer and drive off a bridge to cope.

---

Cool with me braj, just make sure it's the useless $180,000,000.00 bridge to nowhere.

quote:

---

Jeff Kent was an atrocious fielder.

---

Billy Bean says it doesn't matter.


What second basemen in the HOF from the modern era is Biggio better than?

How many playoff series has billy bean won

quote:

---

How many playoff series has billy bean won

---

Is that really the path you want to go down to when propping up an Astros player?

FWIW: I attended all three playoff series that Biggio won. So there is that.

You claimed an overrated GM says fielding doesn't matter to win. I just made a statement proving his ideas have never truly succeeded in winning when it counts

I don't think he is overrated at all. I think he developed a system that worked to bring a low budget team a lot of wins. But ultimately, I don't think a team is going to win without the great pitching and he just can't afford that unless he stumbles upon it.

And his teams have made the playoffs more times in the last 14 years than the Astros have in the last 30, despite the Stros having a budget higher than most teams in a lot of that time.

He is doing something right.

And I agree with the premise that defense is a lot less important than getting on base/scoring runs. I want a good defensive catcher and maybe short stop. I'm happy to have Kent at 2nd base if I am getting his prime run production over your good glove/no hit guy like Darwin Barney.

[This message has been edited by Guitarsoup (edited 1/8/2014 8:43p).]

What is the modern era? Since 1990 when only 1 other 2B has gotten in?

quote:

---

What is the modern era? Since 1990 when only 1 other 2B has gotten in?

---

1990 the modern era? That is the first time I have seen someone draw that line.

Billy Beane is pretty good.

Others, however, have built upon Beane's (and others') work and themselves worked to correct some of the faults in Beane's philosophy and create a better system when at times, Beane has been a little slow to re-evaluate his philosophy.

I think part of the problem with Beane's public perception is "the perfect world list" from 2001 or whatever year it was turned out to be a pretty crappy list.

His metrics became known. Other teams started placing more value on walks and less on relievers and fielders and so the players that he found value in no longer had good value. So it became kind of a cat and mouse game of finding the next undervalued stat to invest in.

Plus with so many people pouring in in the last decade in all sports and them even having a big convention at MIT every year, there is a lot more competition to figure these things out.

But Billy has done a good job with his team and has made the playoffs in half his seasons, despite being grossly out spent by the Rangers AND the Angels in his own division, not to mention the Yankees and Red Sox and most of the rest of the league.

Aren't rings the only thing that matter? How many of those does billy have?

quote:

---

What is the modern era? Since 1990 when only 1 other 2B has gotten in?

---

Typically the modern era begins in 1900 with the founding of the American League and the final codification of the current rules.

quote:

---

Aren't rings the only thing that matter? How many of those does billy have?

---

Ok.... how many of those do the Astros and Rangers have?

quote:

---

Aren't rings the only thing that matter? How many of those does billy have?

---

Depends who you talk to. Many owners just want to turn a profit and winning is just a bonus. S they won't invest enough to win it all.

I believe they all have fewer rings than the Florida ****ing Marlins who may have struck the perfect balance between winning and not giving a **** about winning.

[This message has been edited by TXAggie2011 (edited 1/9/2014 12:40a).]

At least the Astros and Rangers have won playoff series and gotten to the WS

To be fair, Beane has 1 playoff series win.

One game wild card doesn't count sir

**** I forgot about the 06 over Minnesota

quote:

---

His metrics became known. Other teams started placing more value on walks and less on relievers and fielders and so the players that he found value in no longer had good value. So it became kind of a cat and mouse game of finding the next undervalued stat to invest in.

Plus with so many people pouring in in the last decade in all sports and them even having a big convention at MIT every year, there is a lot more competition to figure these things out.

But Billy has done a good job with his team and has made the playoffs in half his seasons, despite being grossly out spent by the Rangers AND the Angels in his own division, not to mention the Yankees and Red Sox and most of the rest of the league.

---

Agreed on most of that, however the point is still that others themselves have been innovators and others have, at times, worked the system better than Beane.

Beane has had his runs, as have the Twins, as have the Rays, etc...

The guy is good, he's made his contributions. There are a lot of bright minds in baseball and have been for awhile.

A few points regarding a couple of themes I've seen throughout this thread.

1) A player's HOF worthiness isn't dependent on how he performed against players of his own position (both historically and contemporarily), but rather how he performed against all of MLB. Talent is not distributed evenly amongst the positions and certain positions tend to harbor a player's defensive deficiencies. Was Biggio one of the best players in baseball for a lengthy period of time? I would argue that he is borderline. I can't comprehend a world in which Biggio is worthy and Barry Bonds is not.

2) Astros fans (and apparently a large portion of baseball writers) have given Biggio a free pass from suspicion of PED usage. The guy had six straight seasons of over 600 plate appearances after major knee surgery in his mid 30's and during the height of the "steroid era". That is suspicious to me. There are plenty of players who haven't tested positive for PED's, yet the suspicion alone has kept them out of the HOF (Bagwell is one of them). I don't understand why he gets a free pass.

[This message has been edited by hawk1689 (edited 1/9/2014 8:03a).]

quote:

---

Was Biggio one of the best players in baseball for a lengthy period of time? I would argue that he is borderline. I can't comprehend a world in which Biggio is worthy and Barry Bonds is not.

---

Borderline? GTFO. 3000 hits?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3,000_hit_club

quote:

---

Astros fans (and apparently a large portion of baseball writers) have given Biggio a free pass from suspicion of PED usage. The guy had six straight seasons of over 600 plate appearances after major knee surgery in his mid 30's and during the height of the "steroid era". That is suspicious to me. There are plenty of players who haven't tested positive for PED's, yet the suspicion alone has kept them out of the HOF (Bagwell is one of them). I don't understand why he gets a free pass.

---

By this logic, any MLB player between 1988-2008 shouldn't ever, ever make the HOF.

quote:

---

1990 the modern era? That is the first time I have seen someone draw that line.

---

I'm just curious because your implication that Craig Biggio was not better than any other Hall of Fame second basemen seemed absurd if you really meant what is normally considered the modern era...

[This message has been edited by JJxvi (edited 1/9/2014 10:11a).]

Smith, only Ripken, Jr. and Henderson have lower batting averages than Biggio in the 3,000 hit club. They also had other outstanding aspects of their games that made them truly unique. Biggio was very, very good for a long time, but not a once-in-a-generation force in any aspect of his fame. He'll get in, he's just not a first ballot kind of player.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/jaws_2B.shtml

Here's a stat that shows that Biggio probably belongs in the Hall, but it's not the overwhelming slam dunk that some make it out to be.

[This message has been edited by ChipFTAC01 (edited 1/9/2014 10:47a).]

I tend to think 1920 would be a better place to start the modern era than 1900. 1920 is the year that they finally outlawed spit balls and all that. Ruth is sold to the Yankees and the Black Sox Scandal was in 1919.

I've seen some say it should be 1969, when the Royals, Brewers (then Pilots), Expos and Padres all started.

So take 1920, Ruth's first year with the Yankees and his first year over 30 HRs.

So say since Ruth joined the Yankees. It isn't like any of us know crap about guys that played before WWI anyway.

Who is Biggio superior to?

Robbie Alomar
Rod Carew
Eddie Collins (played ten years after 1920, but bulk was before. Throw him out if you want)
Bobby Doerr
Nellie Fox
Frankie Frisch
Charlie Gehringer
Joe Gordon
Billy Herman
Roger Hornsby
Tony Lazzeri
Bill Mazeroski
Joe Morgan
Jackie Robinson
Ryne Sandberg
Red Schoendienst

You tell me. Go down the list, and tell me that you really believe that all of those players none were worse than Craig Biggio? If that's the case then I guess the argument is over, you cant be reasoned with.

[This message has been edited by JJxvi (edited 1/9/2014 11:15a).]