Don't Bring Up Domonic Brown
I think it's fair to characterize the less temperate sectors of Phillies fandom as having become gripped with a state of simultaneous mass hysteria over the idea that Domonic Brown must be called up from AA Reading immediately. I don't listen to much sports talk radio anymore, but I turned it on in the car this weekend three times for about two minutes each time. All three times, the hosts and the callers were raging about this issue. There's also a lot of this stuff going around on the blogs.
I would surmise that what inspired the two-minute hate were two recent articles by David Murphy in the Daily News. One was a piece in which he reported that the front office had no intention of bringing Brown up to the big leagues, and in fact, had no set timetable for promoting him to AAA. The second was more of an opinion piece on his blog, titled "Why the Phillies won't, and shouldn't, do anything drastic with Raul Ibanez." I don't know if the Phillies prompted these articles or if Murphy came up with the ideas on his own, but if it was the former and if the Phillies' intent was to nip any clamoring for Brown in the bud, they made a serious miscalculation, because it's done the exact opposite.
Needless to say, most of the people advocating an immediate recall of Brown are not very bright. Their arguments bear all of the hallmarks of talk radio groupthink: a total lack of concern for future consequences, a reflexive blaming of everything on "cheapness" whether it makes any sense or not, an assumption that "doing something" is always better than doing nothing, mindless repeating of talking points, mindless rage, etc. Now - this is NOT to say that an intelligent argument can't be made for bringing Brown up sometime soon. But those are not the arguments that are being thrown around at present. I also think that, in the final analysis, even the intelligent arguments would be incorrect.
Here are some of the reasons why the Phillies shouldn't bring Domonic Brown up now or anytime in the next couple of months.
1. Raul Ibanez is not doing that bad this year.
Yes, his triple-slash isn't so hot, but even that isn't as bad as most of his radio bashers seem to believe: .247/.335/.394. And there are many reasons to believe that these stats are misleading and that Ibanez will improve going forward.
Murphy covers some of these reasons in the blog post I linked above. I don't agree with everything he says there, but in general, his points are sound. What I would add to that is that Ibanez's walk rate and line drive rate are actually HIGHER than not only his career norms, but also his rates from his hot start last year. Basically, what we've seen from Ibanez this year is a combination of (1) bad BABIP luck, which probably won't last, and (2) a power outage, which is very possibly attributable to the delayed injury rehab that Murphy discusses, and which also may not last. If only one of these two things had happened and not the other, no one would be batting an eyelash at Ibanez's stats.
In addition, Ibanez's worst stretch of the season was in April. You can't throw those stats out completely, but more recent stats are of greater value than less recent stats. Since April 20, Ibanez's OPS has been .780. I'm not saying that's satisfactory, but it isn't that bad either.
Also, while Ibanez has struggled in our recent teamwide batting slump just like the rest of the lineup has, the bigger culprit during the slump, as far as corner outfielders go, has been Jayson Werth. So if the slump is really a justification for making drastic moves, then we'd really benefit the most by benching Werth, not Ibanez. But we're obviously not going to do that, nor should we.
2. Domonic Brown is not likely to outperform either Ibanez or Werth in 2010.
While his performance this year has been excellent in light of his age and experience level, that does not mean he would excel in the majors right now. According to minorleaguesplits.com (which, annoyingly, still has his named misspelled as "Dominic"), Brown's current equivalencies are .253/.309/.419. That's lower than what Ibanez has done so far this year even with his bad luck.
3. The success of Jason Heyward, Mike Stanton, and Stephen Strasburg is totally irrelevant.
One of the recurring themes I heard on the radio was that we need to promote Brown to keep up with the rest of the NL East. I don't know what to say to this except that it's really, really stupid. You don't make important decisions on personnel or player development just because you want to look good next to your peers. Every prospect is different, like a snowflake. What another prospect does is totally irrelevant to what you ought to do with your own prospects.
And in this case, Heyward, Stanton, and Strasburg had all, simply put, performed way better at AA than Brown has. Heyward hit .352/.446/.611 last year in 195 AA plate appearances, and also had the benefit of a full major league spring training this year. Stanton posted a monstrous .311/.411/.726 in 238 plate appearances. And everyone knows how dominant Strasburg was in the minors. (Also, he's a pitcher - I don't see how it makes any sense to compare him to an outfielder.) Brown is currently sitting at .308/.382/.556 for the season. While that is very good, it isn't anywhere near as good as what the others did. I know it's irritating that our top prospect is not as good of a prospect as these other guys are, but it helps no one to just pretend he is and force him down the same path. It isn't impossible for Brown to turn into Heyward's and Stanton's equal down the road (despite being older than them) if we develop him according to his own needs. But for now, he should be treated as a very good prospect who has excelled so far in AA, not as a once-in-a-generation prospect who has utterly dominated AA.
You know what this reminds me of? When George Steinbrenner, in the mid-'80s, instructed his front office to promote Jose Rijo to the majors as an 18-year-old just because Dwight Gooden was lighting things up as an 18-year-old for the Mets. Rijo didn't recover from this for years.
4. Bringing up a prospect too early can have long-term negative consequences for his development.
There are many examples of this throughout baseball history. Rijo, for one. Gavin Floyd, to name one with a local angle.
I think this happens for two reasons. First, the reason why you have the minor leagues is so that a prospect can work on weak areas of his game in an environment where the results don't really matter that much. If a pitching prospect needs work on his breaking stuff, then in the minors he can throw as many breaking balls as he wants to, because it's OK if he gets hit hard. In the majors - especially on a contending team like the Phillies - you can't do that. So the prospect will either have his weaknesses exploited or he'll stop working on them. Neither outcome is good for the team. Second, confidence is a big part of being a successful pro athlete. Shatter a young player's confidence and he won't be able to get the most of his talent.
Now, of course, this begs the question of whether Brown is, in fact, not yet ready to be brought to the majors. And I don't claim to know the answer to this for sure. Minor league player development is an opaque and inexact science that few of us really understand. That's what PhillyFriar is here for.
But here's what I do know. Before the year began, John Sickels, a very respected prospects expert, wrote about Brown:
I love this guy, but the tools aren't quite refined yet and they need to give him a solid consolidation season in 2010, start him off in Reading and leave him there until July no matter what he does.
I also know that Brown was raw when we drafted him out of high school in 2006, that he didn't exhibit any power potential until last season, and that he's only played a total of about 90 games above the Class-A level. I also know that he still has some things to work on, such as his ability to make consistent contact. (He is currently striking out about 20% of the time he comes up to bat. Strikeouts are not terribly important in measuring how good a hitter is in the majors, but they are important in projecting how good a minor league hitter is likely to become when he gets to the majors.) All of this leads me to believe that he isn't ready.
Finally, as long I'm on this topic, I'm going to use it a pretext to link to this classic ESPN SportsCenter commercial. Awesome.
5. Brown's development is more important than our success this year.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that Ibanez really is the disaster some are making him out to be (he isn't), and that the season will necessarily be lost with him in left field (it won't). Even so, it would still be wrong to immediately give Brown the job.
And the reason why is because life is going to go on after this year. Contrary to George Allen's ridiculous motto, the future is not now. The future is the future. And the downside risk of a decision that could hurt us for many years to come is greater than the upside benefit of a decision whose purpose would be to help us for this season only.
I don't think people fully grasp how important Brown is to the future of this franchise. We have a fair amount of talent in our farm system, but most of it is in the lower levels. Brown is the ONLY position-player prospect we have left who has (so far) made a successful transition to AA. And every single starter on our major league club is 29 or older. If Brown doesn't turn into a very good major league player, we are going to be royally screwed for years to come.
I realize that most people who call into WIP don't care about the future - that if you present them with a dilemma like this, their automatic response is going to be "Eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die." Let's play craps with the college fund and worry about tomorrow tomorrow. But those people are wrong. If the choice is between sacrificing this season and risking Brown's future development (a false choice - but let's pretend it isn't), then I choose to sacrifice this season. Teams lose their golden ages when they panic over down years and liquidate their long-term interests to relieve that sense of panic. It's foolish and we shouldn't let it happen to us.
94 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great article, great read. I hadn’t heard anything about bringing up Brown but then again I refuse to listen to Phillies sports radio and my blogging time at work had been taken up by another Philadelphia sports until recently.
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
It’s like (insert supid cliched metaphor here)
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 14, 2010 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
Actually that would be a simile oh well- high school english-FAIL
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 14, 2010 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions
What would your approach be if we lost one of our outfielders to trade or injury, knock on wood. Would you just plug in Fransisco or bring up Brown?
I’d imagine that we’d plug in Francisco and call up either Mayberry or Taveras.
Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us. - C&H
by alcatraz0109 on Jun 14, 2010 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Superb work. I couldn’t agree more.
Brown is exactly where he should be. If the team wants to promote him to AAA after the Eastern League all-star game, that’s fine; if they want to get him acclimated to the majors in a low-pressure way as s September callup, I think that’s fine too. But what he’s emphatically not ready to be is a savior for a team coming off two straight pennants. All that does is set him up to fail both on the field and in the clubhouse.
To Tron79’s question, if Werth or Ibanez went down for the year, I still don’t think calling up Brown immediately would be the answer—Francisco and Mayberry are both ahead of him in line—but it would be worth considering.
Forgot to say...
f the team wants to promote him to AAA after the Eastern League all-star game, that’s fine; if they want to get him acclimated to the majors in a low-pressure way as s September callup, I think that’s fine too.
…agreed on both these points.
I should also mention that Crashburn Alley beat me to the punch on some of these points in a post last week, which had slipped my mind.
Very good points. I’d also like to add that if you’re a fan of change for the sake of change, it’s better to avoid swallowing $20MM and jeopardizing your best prospect’s future. I also read some suggestions that Brown be called up and brought off the bench. If that happens, I seriously might have to stop watching baseball.
Two questions
First off, how are Ibanez splits better than Brown’s projection? Jut thought I was going nuts for a second.
Also, as for the reasons he should not be brought up and the primary reason in my opinion.
6. He by no means should be brought up, under any costs, before the trading deadline. He is their farm system now and without him as a chip, or boosting the perceived value of the system, we are basically sitting on nothing MLB ready or close to it. This presents a ton of issues because if he struggles in there, like the rest of the lineup has been, it’s no good for anyone. He turns into someone who is extremely flawed versus someone who is “developing”. It moves along the lines of your developmental point on the micro approach.
The macro approach however, we really don’t have anyone with huge potential, outside of A ball. So you may say we have 4 or 5 guys in A ball, but that level doesn’t translate into pure depth in the prospect realm. You stretch another year out of the system and get some of those A guys developing at AA, then you again have a nice system with trading pieces.
Right, thanks. And also, OBP is the slightly more important component of OPS. So even if they were tied, the higher OBP player (Ibanez) would be having the slightly better year.
Good point on #6.
What about the difference in defense? Any statistics in the regard? UZR? I have to imagine Brown will be able to cover more ground.
Brown would probably be better, but LF is not a very defense-intensive position. How much better could he be? Or to put it another way, even if he is much better, how much would this really help the team? Not that much, I’d say.
Right.
For what it’s worth, Brown’s still very much in the “potential well above-average defender” stage than in the “current defensive stud” stage. TotalZone had him at -2 in Reading last year, -4 in Clearwater, and the reports about him needing to work on his jumps and routes jive with that. And on a less abstract level, Brown’s only played 2 games in left field in his professional career, so it would certainly be tough to ask him to slot in there seamlessly.
The only problem with projections...
The BJH projected Raul to have an OPS of .807 this year. What makes you think they can’t be wrong about Dom Brown?
What makes you think they are wrong about Raul? It’s still entirely possible that he finishes the season close to or above an .807 OPS. But that’s beside the point. Is it worth risking Brown’s long-term development in the hope that he can maybe outperform his projections?
In fact, Raul could even exceed .807. Who knows.
The value of projections is that they provide a reasonable middle-of-the-bell-curve estimate for what will happen. They’re like projecting earnings for a company. Of course it’s possible that earnings will exceed the estimate, but it’s equally possible that they’ll fall short. When you’re planning for the future, it’s best to assume that the projection is accurate, not because it’s always right, but because it’s the best guess we have. And if it’s wrong in one direction, chances are the next projection will be wrong in the other direction.
Ay, I hear you, and I didn’t come here to argue with you guys. I’m just saying Raul can barely catch up to a fastball and played caroms off the Green Monster this weekend like a ’tard.
Believe me, Raul swinging through fastball after fastball has frustrated the hell out of us here, and I sat (head in hands) in the stands Friday watching him flail at balls off the Monster. I think we’d all be more shocked if he wasn’t 38; I mean, I think everyone kind of knew that this was a bad idea in the first place.
But when it comes down to it, I think point #4 weighs heavily in my mind, and probably the collective mindset of most of the posters here. I’m the prospect guy here, and I absolutely love Brown, and I don’t want to see him turn into another Delmon Young. Like TP said, he’s simply far too valuable to the future of this organization to gamble on a sink-or-swim approach.
I just want to thank you for having a site unafraid to re-untouchable Chollie bashing Greg Dobbs’ head in with a baseball bat. It filled me with enthusiasms.
by Wet Luzinski on Jun 14, 2010 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions
heh
And if it’s wrong in one direction, chances are the next projection will be wrong in the other direction.
I believe that logical misstep is commonly known as the gambler’s fallacy
Suffice it to say, other than that you’re 100% correct.
It’s come to my attention that the question “Don’t points 3 and 4 contradict each other?” has been asked. The answer is no, they do not contradict each other.
In point 3, I stated that the success of Heyward et al. is not relevant to our decision on what to do with Brown. The reason it is not relevant is that the circumstances of every prospect’s situation are different. Every prospect is unique.
In point 4, I stated that the failures of certain past prospects who were brought up too early shows that damaging prospects in this manner is possible. Now, if I had said that the failures of these prospects proved that Brown will fail, then one might legitimately be able to say that 3 and 4 were in conflict. But I did not say that. I only said that this is a risk that must be factored into the equation. The purpose was to illustrate the existence of a factor, not to draw a direct comparison between Brown and Rijo/Floyd.
My primary point was that there is a significant level of uncertainty and risk as to (a) whether Brown would do any better than Ibanez for the rest of 2010, and (b) whether Brown will avoid being damaged by an immediate call-up. When the question at issue is whether a risk of failure exists, then only examples of failure are relevant, while examples of success are irrelevant. Here, it is pretty crystal clear that there is a significant level of risk. And even if we were to assume that the risk stood precisely in equipoise with the potential benefit of a call-up (which is not the case – the risk is greater than the benefit), then the correct decision would be to err on the side of valuing the long-term well-being of our franchise over the 2010 season.
Right. Heyward, Stanton and Strasburg were so dominant that it was clear they had nothing left to accomplish in the minors. Brown’s not at that level, so the risk that he couldn’t hold his own in the majors and thus might damage his confidence is correspondingly higher.
Right. The point is that Brown is a very, very good prospect, and I’d wager money that, barring injury, he has a nice career as a solid-to-All-Star level major league starter for a number of years.
Heyward/Stanton/Strasburg, though, are just otherworldly talents.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
And they are all in our goddamned division. Shoot me in the head right now, because it’s going to be a looooong, probably painful, decade.
Yeah I was going to come here to say that it’s just unfortunate that all three got pooted into the NL East.
http://www.thegoodphight.com
We should just be thankful that no two of them are on the same team… I am more scared of what Washington may look like in a year or two with Strasburg and Harper, but no one player makes a team.
This is a fair point.
The Braves are really the team to worry about. They have a very deep farm system even without Heyward, plus they have a fairly big budget – not as big as ours, but in the same ballpark.
The Marlins’ budget should grow once their new park opens, but it will still be relatively small, and their farm system isn’t that great.
With the Nats, a lot of it will probably depend on how their draft this year turns out.
Hate to harbinger of doom here, but it’s not hard to envision an NL East five years from now that has the Phils languishing in the basement. The Braves probably have the brightest future given the McCann/Heyward/Hanson core; the Marlins continue to churn out young talent, and may (as you point out, TP) actually have the money to keep some of it in a few years); Mike Rizzo actually knows what he’s doing with the Nats, and Zimmerman/Strasburg/Harper/Zimmerman is a really nice core going forward; and the Mets simply have too much money to continue F’ing up this badly (i.e. the “Omar will be fired” argument). By contrast, the entire current core of the Phillies will be gone and/or well past its prime, with not much certainty on the prospect front right now.
Another reason to have kept Cliff Lee this year!

by David S. Cohen on Jun 14, 2010 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Who’s the other Zimmerman? Don?
;)
Remember the Phitans
by RememberthePhitans on Jun 14, 2010 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions
And the Marlins have no fan base
"Game 7's are tough... It's a game that's made for men and our guys proved to be men today." -Laviolette
by PatterPoet95 on Jun 15, 2010 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions
Great post. I think we know how valuable talk radio in Philly is. I hate when people characterize fan behavior and other negatives as being only bad here (Did anyone see the Boston/Lakers game last night? Kobe had something thrown at him in the 4th quarter! If that’s Philly we get killed for it), but our talk radio is that bad.
I love the “We need to show our peers that we have unbelievable prospects argument.” That’s like saying we need to compete with them. Hello, who has been the best team in the division the last 4 years? They need to compete with us, which is why they have their prospects. It’s like they think you get style points that help the team somehow for showing off a prospect.
by PhillyPhanatic20 on Jun 14, 2010 3:03 PM EDT reply actions
To be fair, I think talk radio sucks in every city. Its voice is just louder in Philadelphia because sports fans in Philadelphia care more in general. It’s probably equally influential (and pernicious) in other U.S. cities where the fans care a lot – Boston, NYC, Chicago, Detroit, etc.
Is he that bad? I used to think of him as a semi-voice of reason in comparison to his peers in the industry, but the last few times I’ve listened to him he has seemed pretty annoying.
The Fat Man
is the worst. He was better having a partner (Mad Dog now on Sirius) because it kept him in check. Now with just him it has fallen to where I actually turn to Michael Kay, yes that Michael Kay.
"Call me dumb, call me stupid, whatever. I block shots."
By the way, this discussion reminded me of this amusing article from The New Yorker, about the time Francesa and Russo had to fill in on Don Imus’ politics show after Imus got fired.
Great piece.
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
Just to reinforce #3 a bit… Heyward’s plate discipline has always been simply astounding for his age, and if you’re going to risk rushing any prospect, he’s the type of guy you do it with. On the other hand, whatever Stanton’s numbers at Double-A — and don’t get me wrong, he was laying waste to the Southern League — his plate discipline left a lot to be desired, and I think it’s a huge mistake for the Marlins to have called him up right now (and I’m not alone in that assessment). He’s already struck out 7 times in just 19 at bats, and I think anyone expecting him to replicate Heyward’s success is delusional.
Point being, even among the rare talents at the top of the prospect pecking order, it’s difficult to expect immediate production. Sickels is 100% right when he says Brown’s long-term development could really use this year for consolidation.
I loved this piece, and it wasn’t just for the ESPN link, which I had never seen before, but may have to use for game recaps for every subsequent Moyer start like Saturday’s. Quite a lagniappe. As was use of the word “equipoise.”
I noted yesterday that the Fightins were stirring the call-Brown-up now fire, so it’s not just talk radio that does this. I do think this medium is great for expanding thoughts and getting into logical nitty-gritty, as neither space nor time is rationed like in traditional media, and which I think you did especially well here.
Since April 20, Ibanez’s OPS has been .780. I’m not saying that’s satisfactory, but it isn’t that bad either.
Team / LFer / 2010 OPS
WAS/Willingham/0.922
CIN/Gomes/0.900
CHC/Soriano/0.890
SFO/Torres/0.866
LAD/ManRam/0.851
MIL/Braun/0.851
COL/Smith/0.838
STL/Holliday/0.809
NYM/Bay/0.806
(Raul @ 0.780)
FLA/Coghlan/0.726
PIT/Milledge/0.662
HOU/Lee/0.660
ARZ/Jackson/0.657
ATL / Cabrera / 0.642
SDG/Salazar/0.591
That puts him 10th 0f 16th for all starting LFers in the game, comparing his ‘what have you done for me lately’ using a selective endpoint of 4/20 where his OPS was lower than at any point since then. His current OPS of 0.729 (including the whole season) puts him in the same rank amongst the starting LFer for all other NL teams.
Maybe 0.7xx isn’t horrific, but it’s certainly not good by any stretch. Factor in what he’s being paid for that production (which is a sunk cost so you can’t fix that regardless) and he really is sucking.
LF is the position you put your worst fielder in after first base gets filled. These guys need to produce as hittiers and he’s not doing it.
Now….I’ll agree Brown isn’t likely to be better RIGHT NOW, but I wouldn’t try to argue that Ibanez ’isn’t that bad’.
His BABIP is .03 points below his career average. Sure, he’s not playing great, but its far to early to write him off, as much of his struggles can be attributed to bad luck.
On the positive side, his walk rate is higher than it’s ever been in his career.
His HR/FB is also about half of his career norm. If that starts regressing toward normal, that ugly slugging percentage will get a good deal better.
In case you haven’t yet realized, Bilzo is quite adept at taking things out of context and using them to support his argument.
i read the whole article, that’s the one point I took exception with. I thought the rest was fine and fair, I just wouldn’t try to sugar coat how bad Raul has been when compared to the other LFers in the league.
Points 2, 3, and 4 are perfectly valid and I agree with them. Point 1 is a reach in my opinion. (point 5 is a tweener….if I thought Domonic Brown would put them over the hump to winning a WS this year, I’d say go for it, but there’s no way to quantitate or prove that would be the case….so I’ll side with TP there).
For the record…I don’t think that statement that I quoted can possibly be taken out of context, as the header is “Raul Ibanez is not doing that bad this year”. It’s bad.
Reading the rest of Point 1 might help if you’re going to draw a conclusion about Point 1. I find it hard to believe that you’re still unfamiliar with the concepts of BABIP, HR/FB, etc.
I accept that he has a little bad luck, but I’m not going to chalk it up to completely bad luck. That doesn’t make him ‘not that bad’.
His OPS this season is currently at 0.729, which is his worst since 2000. I’m not confusing effort/luck with results or making excuses for him or saying he’s not “that bad”.
He’s old. He’s been bad since his surgery. It sucks, I wish he were better, but he’s hurting the ballclub with his current performance, and I’m not inclined to think it’s going to get significantly better. He might have a week where he rakes, but I don’t expect a month of that.
Basically, in so many words, it’s an ideological precommitment. Some people have a deep-seated need to believe that anything that ever happens in life to other people is deserved. I think the psychological root of it is that it relieves them of any need to (1) acknowledge that their own comfortable life circumstances are in large part an undeserved accident of birth, or (2) feel any compassion toward or responsibility for the welfare of their fellow man.
In order to justify this world view on more significant matters, the mind applies it across-the-board to trivial matters like baseball too, so as to be consistent. Oh, so you say this pitcher had a .450 BABIP? Well, I don’t want to hear excuses! All I care about are results! Clearly he deserved it on some level!
Do you have a factual basis for that refusal
He’s old. He’s been bad since his surgery
His OPS this season is currently at 0.729, which is his worst since 2000
Way to not answer the question dummy.
And seriously, what is the deal with that “sunk cost” comment? So what you’re saying is you know it’s an irrelevant fact, but you’re going to base your opinion on it anyway? Alrighty then.
Kinda like his completely baseless hatred for Bobby Abreu.
by FuquaManuel on Jun 15, 2010 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions
In other words, it’s one thing to be innocently dumb, it’s another thing to be dumb and dishonest.
by FuquaManuel on Jun 15, 2010 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions
you will never make me like Bobby Abreu, but feel free to keep trying or better yet, use that as an argument when you feel your other statements are inadequate to state your point, or refute mine.
Also, if, despite being presented with overwhelming statistical evidence to disprove your dislike of Abreu, you continue to hate him, one can only wonder where your hatred stems from.
His race is the first thing that springs to my mind.
well that’s pretty weak on your part, because it has nothing to do with it. You’ve tried to play a race card on me before when I said ManRam (and a few others…maybe Bonds?) were labeled as clubhouse cancers. You asked for white versions and I immediately stabbed back with Wagner and Tyler Houston. It’s not his race. Sheesh. You certainly see me bashing Chooch all the time don’t you…oh wait…it’s just Venezuelans I don’t like. Panamians are fine. My bad.
Yes, I honestly think you are a racist based on your irrational disdain for Abreu. Because, really, what else could it be? If it looks like a rat, and smells like a rat…
But more importantly, I think your opinion of matters pertaining to baseball is not worth the tiny piece of cyberspace it’s written on because of your irrational hatred of Bobby Abreu. I’m simply doing my part to see to it that others arrive at the same conclusion about you that I have.
I’m not going to make any accusations here, but was just reminded of this.
http://www.thegoodphight.com/2008/11/20/666615/phils-trade-golson-to-texa#10164759
Ah yes, I remember that exchange. It also sticks out in my mind as another stop on the “FuquaManuel losing all respect for Bilzo-express.”
by FuquaManuel on Jun 16, 2010 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m admitting that he’s doing excessively bad once you factor in his salary and the effective ROI, which magnifies how bad he is compared to other guys in that group outperforming him, of which I’d suspect (but don’t know) to include
everybody not named Ramirez, Holliday, Bay, and Lee. (So it could be worse…we could have El Caballo).
Sunk cost just means you can’t fix that mistake.
The topic of this post is not how good or bad Ibanez’s contract is. The topic of the post is how good or bad Ibanez is on the field as it pertains to the question of whether Domonic Brown should play in his place. Cost is completely irrelevant.
I’ve already agreed that Domonic Brown should not be called up. You just took exception to me claiming that one of your points was exaggerated. It’s ok to differ in opinions.
but moving on to how Ibanez’s salary makes his lack of production ever worse….
We pay Ibanez somewhere in the teen millions per year to play LF, which is a contractual obligation we’ve entered into and cannot be undone. The phils could probably be getting similar production from about anybody right now in LF (Ibanez VORP = 2.8, or…28th in the majors for LFers…WHICH IS TERRIBLE).
Now I’m not blaming him for Amaro’s mistake in giving him that contract…hell…I’d have signed it too. But say the Phils budget had another 15 mil or so to spend this year…..hmmm….I wonder if there’s anybody they could’ve kept around at that price for another year?
That exacerbates his suckitude.
Don’t bring up Domonic Brown yet. He might be ready by the end of this season, but there’s no reason to rush. Raul has struggled, but that’s no reason to put that on a rookie Brown to pick up the slack in LF. Francisco has shown improvement the last 10 games especially against LHPitching. I do think Brown could make the jump from double-A to the bigs, however; there’s no rush. Raul deserves to play, is getting paid to play & com’on, it’s only a 1/3 way through the season
oh I get it
Double meaning from the headline!
1. “Don’t bring up” = “Don’t promote to Major Leagues.”
2. “Don’t bring up” = “Don’t raise the topic.”
If you intended that subtextual meaning, high five! If not, “reader response criticism” just owned your face!
http://www.thegoodphight.com
Sounds like a false consciousness to me.
by Wet Luzinski on Jun 15, 2010 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions

by 































