Jump to content

New Fielding Stat


WietersOvechkin

Recommended Posts

If the award is indeed considered "garbage" (I certainly do not consider it garbage merely because they may have voted some apparently less than deserving receipients in the past) it makes no sense for the same folks who consider it as such to use it quite contradictorily as if it is still the ultimate defensive award. Either it is valid or it isn't is all I am saying. To me, anyone who uses it to describe a great defensive player is validating it as still a valid award. Further, in using the term, common sense should dictate it only should be used describing those players who have actually received it. I don't think you can have it both ways.

Full disclosure -- this is the only post I've read in this entire thread.

This makes absolute sense to me. Call someone "above-average", "plus" or whatever, but everyone should stop using "gold glover" as a way to describe someone that is great, defensively. The list of actual "Gold Glovers" has an embarssing number of players who clearly are not the best at their position. Revolt! To the streets!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply
If the award is indeed considered "garbage" (I certainly do not consider it garbage merely because they may have voted some apparently less than deserving receipients in the past) it makes no sense for the same folks who consider it as such to use it quite contradictorily as if it is still the ultimate defensive award. Either it is valid or it isn't is all I am saying. To me, anyone who uses it to describe a great defensive player is validating it as still a valid award. Further, in using the term, common sense should dictate it only should be used describing those players who have actually received it. I don't think you can have it both ways.

I agree with your conclusions and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Full disclosure -- this is the only post I've read in this entire thread.

This makes absolute sense to me. Call someone "above-average", "plus" or whatever, but everyone should stop using "gold glover" as a way to describe someone that is great, defensively. The list of actual "Gold Glovers" has an embarssing number of players who clearly are not the best at their position. Revolt! To the streets!

I propose we change the term to "Wagnerian" as an ode to Honus Wagner, the world's greatest shortstop for the Louisville nine and the Pittsburghs of the turn of the last century. "Wagnerian" would also conjure up images of Richard Wagner, composer of many bombastic and imposing operas like "Die Walküre", so that whenever we're talking about great fielders we could have the Kill the Rabbit song going through our brains, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I propose we change the term to "Wagnerian" as an ode to Honus Wagner, the world's greatest shortstop for the Louisville nine and the Pittsburghs of the turn of the last century. "Wagnerian" would also conjure up images of Richard Wagner, composer of many bombastic and imposing operas like "Die Walküre", so that whenever we're talking about great fielders we could have the Kill the Rabbit song going through our brains, too.

Plus, you'd have great default music for "webgem" reals!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with Jeter getting it. I have seen him make some fantastic plays that recent Orioles shortstops could only imagine in their dreams. Just because you don't like the selections doesn't mean the award is not valid. Just respect the fact that the majority of Gold Glove Award winners were most deserving. Of course if you wish to focus in on questionable winners you can but it doesn't invalidate the majority who were most deserving. Every Oriole I named was most deserving. Nobody would ever question that. If Markakis was deserving he would get it. Just because you favor Oriole players doesn't mean they should get preference either.

And you say your wife opted for money for a face lift so she could meet someone else over a diamong ring celebrating your 25th anniversary?

Nah... can't be... why would she do something like that? I can't believe it. :rolleyes:

So when you say "the majority of Gold Glove Award winners were most deserving" you're admitting that some weren't. Ergo... in your "logic" this disrespects Brooks, Belanger, Blair, just as much as someone saying Markakis plays "gold glove caliber" defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I propose we change the term to "Wagnerian" as an ode to Honus Wagner, the world's greatest shortstop for the Louisville nine and the Pittsburghs of the turn of the last century. "Wagnerian" would also conjure up images of Richard Wagner, composer of many bombastic and imposing operas like "Die Walküre", so that whenever we're talking about great fielders we could have the Kill the Rabbit song going through our brains, too.

Also, any sports writer who describes a well hit home run as "Ruthian" should immediatley have their credentials pulled. Since they are not, and can never be, Babe Ruth, they can therefore not... by definition... hit a homerun of "Ruthian proportions."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you say your wife opted for money for a face lift so she could meet someone else over a diamong ring celebrating your 25th anniversary?

Nah... can't be... why would she do something like that? I can't believe it. :rolleyes:

So when you say "the majority of Gold Glove Award winners were most deserving" you're admitting that some weren't. Ergo... in your "logic" this disrespects Brooks, Belanger, Blair, just as much as someone saying Markakis plays "gold glove caliber" defense.

How is that relevant or even appropriate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got a question for you, Old#5Fan.

Would you object to someone referring to Heath Ledger's performance in The Dark Knight as "Oscar caliber"?

Since I don't follow who actually wins the Oscar, I would have no problem with someone stating his performance deserves "Oscar" consideration, but if he doesn't actually win the Oscar, it would be highly questionable to state it was such caliber in reality, unless again you question the voting selection. Regardless, the same applies he either wins it or he doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, any sports writer who describes a well hit home run as "Ruthian" should immediatley have their credentials pulled. Since they are not, and can never be, Babe Ruth, they can therefore not... by definition... hit a homerun of "Ruthian proportions."

Is there a "Ruthian" award for hitting a tape measure clout? If not your comparison is well off the mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you say your wife opted for money for a face lift so she could meet someone else over a diamong ring celebrating your 25th anniversary?

Nah... can't be... why would she do something like that? I can't believe it. :rolleyes:

So when you say "the majority of Gold Glove Award winners were most deserving" you're admitting that some weren't. Ergo... in your "logic" this disrespects Brooks, Belanger, Blair, just as much as someone saying Markakis plays "gold glove caliber" defense.

Not really, but it does give some reason to dismiss the award entirely which I disagree with. A few questionable selections shouldn't invalidate the majority who weren't questionable.

The entire problem can be summed up thusly. If one views the award as attained by ill equipped judging voters (as those claim because of certain past receipients they dispute should have received it) than using it to proclaim a player as "Gold Glove Caliber" particularly when he didn't recieve the votes by the same panel which one believes make bad decisions anyway than why place any value on the award at all by using it as if it is genuinely praiseworthy?

It either is or it isn't and a player either receives it or he doesn't. You don't use it as a descriptive term of praiseworthiness if you view it as invalid or if the player you thought should have gotten it doesn't get it. Get it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will cheer you up. :)

Mario%20Cunning%20Plan.jpg

n11316612_36179579_7319.jpg

This is a better version!

Between these two posts, and Wedge's in Belkast's thread about "Why did you kill Belkast, again?" we're getting some nice nominees for "OH Post of the Year" this week.

Unfortunately, though, no post may be considered up to that "caliber" until it wins, so we won't be able to give out the award this year. Sorry guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...