Originally Posted by BDj23:
Game is blacked out on MLB.tv. I have to listen to Rex Hudler.
Life is suffering
Jim Edmonds is so incredibly good in the booth.
I doubt there's a way to find it, but if you can get a recording of the exchange he had with Ankiel right before Pena's double to drive in the run, it was really incredible.
He's talking about how pitchers have some luxury with a pitcher up next in dealing with the batter. He asked Ankiel how he handled things when he was a pitcher. Ankiel gave a good technical response and for most that would've been the end of it. Edmonds, because he's just a natural up there, doubled back and said something like "yeah, that's a good answer when you're up here and with the benefit of hindsight but I'm talking about you at 20 yrs old and with your stuff...."
Ankiel then went into it more directly and provided more information.
It's the kind of stuff you could spend millions trying to teach Dan to do and he just wouldn't. He's not a natural like Edmonds. A-Rod was the same way when he first hit the booth before they crammed Mendoza and that other clown in the booth with him. Pedro Martinez and Orel Hersheiser were also naturals.
Some guys just go in the booth and this stuff is easy for them. Then again, I don't think Jim Edmonds has ever made a thing look difficult in his life. That guy would make chopping wood look like a ballet. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Jim Edmonds is so incredibly good in the booth.
I doubt there's a way to find it, but if you can get a recording of the exchange he had with Ankiel right before Pena's double to drive in the run, it was really incredible.
He's talking about how pitchers have some luxury with a pitcher up next in dealing with the batter. He asked Ankiel how he handled things when he was a pitcher. Ankiel gave a good technical response and for most that would've been the end of it. Edmonds, because he's just a natural up there, doubled back and said something like "yeah, that's a good answer when you're up here and with the benefit of hindsight but I'm talking about you at 20 yrs old and with your stuff...."
Ankiel then went into it more directly and provided more information.
It's the kind of stuff you could spend millions trying to teach Dan to do and he just wouldn't. He's not a natural like Edmonds. A-Rod was the same way when he first hit the booth before they crammed Mendoza and that other clown in the booth with him. Pedro Martinez and Orel Hersheiser were also naturals.
Some guys just go in the booth and this stuff is easy for them. Then again, I don't think Jim Edmonds has ever made a thing look difficult in his life. That guy would make chopping wood look like a ballet.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Jim Edmonds is so incredibly good in the booth.
I doubt there's a way to find it, but if you can get a recording of the exchange he had with Ankiel right before Pena's double to drive in the run, it was really incredible.
He's talking about how pitchers have some luxury with a pitcher up next in dealing with the batter. He asked Ankiel how he handled things when he was a pitcher. Ankiel gave a good technical response and for most that would've been the end of it. Edmonds, because he's just a natural up there, doubled back and said something like "yeah, that's a good answer when you're up here and with the benefit of hindsight but I'm talking about you at 20 yrs old and with your stuff...."
Ankiel then went into it more directly and provided more information.
It's the kind of stuff you could spend millions trying to teach Dan to do and he just wouldn't. He's not a natural like Edmonds. A-Rod was the same way when he first hit the booth before they crammed Mendoza and that other clown in the booth with him. Pedro Martinez and Orel Hersheiser were also naturals.
Some guys just go in the booth and this stuff is easy for them. Then again, I don't think Jim Edmonds has ever made a thing look difficult in his life. That guy would make chopping wood look like a ballet.
Supposedly he could put his junk in a hotdog bun pretty well too. No clue where I heard that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
One of my favorite players of all time.
Ozzie is my unquestioned #1 but Edmonds is my #2.
And he's so damn appreciating of the Cardinals organization and its fans. He speaks of LaRussa in nearly reverential tones because of how hard TLR drove him and how it made him into the player he became.
It's just impossible not to like Hollywood, IMO. I was so disappointed he wasn't able to finish his comeback that spring and make a run at 400 homers.
And I was flat out pissed when he fell off the HoF ballot in his first year of eligibility. That's just a massive load of shit. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Jim Edmonds is so incredibly good in the booth.
I doubt there's a way to find it, but if you can get a recording of the exchange he had with Ankiel right before Pena's double to drive in the run, it was really incredible.
He's talking about how pitchers have some luxury with a pitcher up next in dealing with the batter. He asked Ankiel how he handled things when he was a pitcher. Ankiel gave a good technical response and for most that would've been the end of it. Edmonds, because he's just a natural up there, doubled back and said something like "yeah, that's a good answer when you're up here and with the benefit of hindsight but I'm talking about you at 20 yrs old and with your stuff...."
Ankiel then went into it more directly and provided more information.
It's the kind of stuff you could spend millions trying to teach Dan to do and he just wouldn't. He's not a natural like Edmonds. A-Rod was the same way when he first hit the booth before they crammed Mendoza and that other clown in the booth with him. Pedro Martinez and Orel Hersheiser were also naturals.
Some guys just go in the booth and this stuff is easy for them. Then again, I don't think Jim Edmonds has ever made a thing look difficult in his life. That guy would make chopping wood look like a ballet.
I love Edmonds, i wish he would call more games. But since i live in the KC market MLB.tv blacks out the game and i have to tune into the local broadcast. I'm sure Hud is a nice guy, but he is too corny for me. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Ozzie is my unquestioned #1 but Edmonds is my #2.
And he's so damn appreciating of the Cardinals organization and its fans. He speaks of LaRussa in nearly reverential tones because of how hard TLR drove him and how it made him into the player he became.
It's just impossible not to like Hollywood, IMO. I was so disappointed he wasn't able to finish his comeback that spring and make a run at 400 homers.
And I was flat out pissed when he fell off the HoF ballot in his first year of eligibility. That's just a massive load of shit.
Probably a top 5 defensive CF of all time along with being top 5 offensively at CF possibly? [Reply]
Originally Posted by :
Center Field (15th):
60.4 career WAR / 42.6 7yr-peak WAR / 51.5 JAWS
Average HOF CF (out of 19):
71.2 career WAR / 44.6 7yr-peak WAR / 57.9 JAWS
Damn he was close to HOF, didn't realize there were 19 CF in the HoF. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
Damn he was close to HOF, didn't realize there were 19 CF in the HoF.
There really aren't, though. Especially not when you look at the modern era.
Modern Era CFers in the Hall
Mantle
Mays
DiMaggio
Griffey
Snider
Puckett
Ashburn
Doby
And then you have Cobb and Speaker who belong regardless of era. If you want to start including guys like Averill and Roush from ye olden days you're welcome to, but they don't do anyone's argument to exclude Edmonds any favors. A few others got in as Negro Leaguers and were called CFers; some played a fair amount of both. But primary CFers in the modern era plus no-brainers from the pre-war days gives you something like 10-12 Hall of Fame centerfielders.
Edmonds is easily on par with Ashburn, Doby and Snider. And here's what's always really irked the shit out of me:
Career fWAR from age 22-40 for HoFer A: 63.3
Career fWAR from age 22-40 for Edmonds: 64.5
Now that's not entirely fair because HoFer A had among the greatest 'pre-22' stretches in baseball history and that gives him an undeniably better career than Edmonds. But for 85% of his career, when they were contemporaries, Jim Edmonds was arguably a better player than Ken Griffey Jr.
Think about that. Griffey was a no-brainer. A shoe-in with 99% of the vote. He was amazing. But from 1995 through 2010 when both guys were playing at the same ages, Jim Edmonds was a better ballplayer than Griffey. The only way to even tighten that argument up is to give Griffey credit from 1991-1994 for his ages 22-24 seasons when Edmonds was in the minors or not a full-time starter. But for that 15 year span when both guys were starting, Edmonds was better. And for the 9 years that they shared a division, Junior was the second best CFer in his own division.
And Edmonds fell off on the first damn ballot. That's asinine. I understand folks that don't think he's ultimately a HoFer. He's not an 'inner circle' guy because of injuries and the fact that he didn't really get a starters gig until 24 yrs old. I get that; totally understandable. I disagree because I think CF is underrepresented in the modern era and we should have honored a guy who had few peers over the last quarter century. But I understand why some don't think he's quite there. The Griffey comparison takes some mental gymnastics and fun with arbitrary endpoints while not giving Griffey credit for the thing that made him so amazing; his skills at such a young age. Griffey was obviously more deserving and deserved every one of the 99% of the vote that he got.
But for Edmonds to be his equal or superior over the length of time they were both starting (and roughly 85% of Griffey's career) and not even see a second ballot is unbelievable. [Reply]
Matheny waiting till the game is lost before getting anyone up again. Can’t let anyone’s feelings or ego be bruised because the team has a backup plan.
When you didn’t go to Hicks for two innings if needed after his 7 pitch inning, you were committed to Norris for two innings if needed.
I’m okay with Norris pitching the 2nd inning. We have no one better. But, we could all see his quality of pitches were just not the same as his first inning of work. If a baseball dufus like me can see the difference, they can. But instead of getting an plan B going, Matheny just sits and does nothing. I guess he’s privately praying, crossing his fingers and hoping it doesn’t go bad.
Your on a 7/11 losing streak. How about playing with some more urgency. [Reply]
