Denial of Ichiro comments
DMZ · January 12, 2007 at 3:58 pm · Filed Under Mariners
We’ve heard from Ichiro’s agent. They entirely deny that the comments were “as reported” in Sankei Sports, also noting that making those remarks in front of reporters would have caused them to appear in many places.
I’m puzzled by this Ichiro defense thing, mack. If you are watching him play and deciding that he’s not very good in centre, surely you -are- analysing it, which seems to directly contradict this statement:
“Perhaps you momentarily forgot that there are other ways to enjoy the game than to discuss it or analyze it, one of those being, to actually watch it.”
It’s interesting how people defend their (subjective, yes, I’m aware) opinions by implying that all the rest of us do is scurry through databases, putting stats together like so many little bits of Lego, and it’s a little insulting to hear that when most everyone on this board takes fandom to giddy new heights.
I’m also mildly bemused by the thought that having a ‘subjective’ opinion makes said position immune to criticism. If I said “Shakespeare was a talentless hack who could be outwritten by a 4 year old with no arms,” I’m not sure what reaction I’d get from the English students, but I’m faily certain it wouldn’t be, “What a fine subjective opinion you possess, my friend! Come, let us drink some excellent ale at yonder bar!”
Granted, your post is slightly better as it alludes to -reasons- why you dislike Ichiro in centre, but then again I could say that the Bard had terrible grammar and that wouldn’t make me any more correct.
The funny thing is, I’m solidly in the scouty side of evaluating defense. But gut feel isn’t scouting, I’m afraid.
the irony….I doubt anyone here would defend Ichiro in center based only upon defensive metrics….the sample size is just way too small for him in center….
Most of the “yah, Ichiro is in center!” is actually based more on “baseball wisdom” which I guess in a guttural sense could be in the same ballpark as intuition (though I’d say intuition based upon a sound reasoning)….
Go to your room until you learn how to share…. 😛
There is no need to apologize. Anyone with a set of eyeballs knows that Ichiro is better in right field. It was pretty easy for him to look good there, since there is less ground to cover than in Center or Left field in Safeco. I think he will be better in Center than he looked last year, but it may be tough for him to extend his streak of Gold Glove awards, unless it’s given to him purely on reputation, which is always possible.
and I want to see that tv clip Jason was describing a few days back, where Ichiro drew his diagram of the area he should cover as a centerfielder….
Yeah. My fault. What was I thinking, coming along. I’ll stop doing that.
Here’s the thing – if people are reading your abrasive, ill-supported arguments and finding them abrasive and ill-supported, perhaps it’s worth considering that regardless of what you think you wrote, the thing to do isn’t to remind them to go back and re-read your abrasive, ill-supported arguments, and instead consider that however brilliant you believe you them to be, they’re pissing people off for some reason that might be worth discovering, so you can stop coming off as making abrasive and ill-supported arguments.
Unless you don’t care about that, which it’s pretty clear you don’t, so I’m not sure what exactly is your point except “Ichiro sucks in center and people who disagree with me are dumb”.
So clearly, what I need to do is go read your abrasive and ill-supported arguments again.
If Ichiro is an “A” centerfielder and a “A+” right fielder I’d still prefer to see him in center, as it’s “easier” to find a corner outfielder who can rake than it is to find a great hitting center fielder. It’s a better (potential) utilization of resources, regardless of what it does to Ichiro’s individual value.
The “last place rangers”? How were they in last place?
Sure, they finished fourth in 2000, but in 1999 they won the division (Seattle finished third). In 1998 they won the division (Seattle finished third). It was hardly a given that Texas would finish poorly (especially since they just added the greatest free agent in the history of sports), plus Seattle was fielding a team that projected to have a really lousy offense (Seattle’s best hitter in 2001 was a guy who’d never been a competent hitter before).
I’ll assume you are referring to Boone and not Edgar… even so, it’s not entirely true either. Boone was a fine hitter in 1994, was terrible in ’96 and ’97, OK in ’98, and flirted with competence in two season prior to 2001.
If I remember correctly, the 2001 offense was projected to be solid, but unspectacular. Remember, Olerud and Edgar were on-base machines who had reasonable power. Plus, the Mariners had just added Ichiro, and the rest of the projected lineup had Javier/McLemore, and Cameron who could all reach base and run the bases well. That lineup looked much more promising than the ones we have entered the last three seasons with.
It would make sense to trade Ichiro at the deadline if your GM wasn’t Bavasi. When someone has proved, as Bavasi has, that he will happily accept garbage in exchange for value, why would anyone ever offer him anything close to a balanced deal?
#51 Ichiro in “centre”…
Quick! Call Homeland Security, a Canadian is loose, simulating sabremetric talk.
I’m Canadian? Oookay then.
w/r/t A-rod: I am, quite seriously, writing those canard posts.
– Here’s the thing – if people are reading your abrasive, ill-supported arguments
First, I do want to thank those of you who read my comments.
Now. Actually, the abrasive comments came after the comments that did not require support.
Let’s recap here:
I made the statement, “And I’ll tell ya – I really wish he’d move back to right field. It really pained me to see balls hit over his head while he was learning on the job.” This is a type of statement that does not require “support.” What, you want me to measure the pain?
So, gwangung took the time to respond, essentially, “prove it.”
msb took the time to mutter about canards.
Then, as Mat pointed out, I made that “amazingly condescending” – and it was – statement about watching games. Thanks for the helpful behavioral tips, by the way.
Next, I got Graham saying, “If you are watching him play and deciding” – did you read what I said? I’m not deciding anything. Then there’s, “If I said “Shakespeare was a talentless hack who could” – well, what I essentially said is, “I don’t like King Lear.” I didn’t say, “Pericles is better than King Lear.”
And dmz: “So clearly, what I need to do is go read your abrasive and ill-supported arguments again.”
No. This is an abrasive argument. You guys are so eager to jump into the swimming pool that you look at every elevated object as a diving board – and you’re rude about it, too.
Not once did any of you “questioners” actually ask me if I was evaluating Ichiro’s performance. Instead, you responded as if I had made a factually false statement and you were going to prove me right.
I don’t mind playing the role of the scold, and I sure as there are three bases don’t mind mixing it up.
But, lemme ask you something – is this how you talk to each other in person? Really? A guy says, “I don’t like watching Ichiro struggle in center,” and you say, “prove it?” What sort of response are you expecting in return?
Oh, here’s some abrasion, dmz: do you not have a thesaurus, or have you simply fallen in love the phrase “abrasive and ill-supported?”
At the end of the day, I do thank you for taking the time to engage me. But some of you don’t seem to have put your best foot forward while doing so.
Frankly, I don’t at this point care at all if you think I’m putting my best foot forward.
You’re not picking up on cues that you’re coming across as a dick. You’re looking at angry responses to you being rude as being rude to you.
Now, are you intentionally trolling? Do you just not get that you’re making people angry? Why not? Why should we care? At what point should we decide that we’re not getting through to you and it’s not worth it?
And why didn’t we come to that conclusion much earlier?
I don’t know. And I don’t care. If everyone you meet gets agitated and angry at you, shouldn’t you at some point realize that you’re the common thread?
You have determined you don’t like the way Ichiro plays centrefield. Ergo, there was a descision involved.
And no, what you said is ‘I don’t like King Lear because there aren’t enough Martians involved’. There is a distinct difference.
King Lear, in fairness, could well be much improved by additional Martians.
Hey, I didn’t start it, but I don’t mind finishing it. And, like I say – if we were in a bar, you boys would have behaved differently.
But, I have to say, I still don’t think that saying, “I like watching Ichiro in right field more than in left” is a comment deserving of the response. And, so far as “making people angry . . .” it would seem that you have an awful sensitive trigger.
And because Graham was kind enough to respond directly to my post, I’d just like to say: I have not “determined (I) don’t like the way Ichiro plays centerfield, I – and I’ve repeated this several times – simply don’t like watching him struggle in center field. That’s all.
Sometimes a cigar really is, just a cigar.
What is the difference between not liking the way he plays centre and not liking watching him struggle to play centre (which he doesn’t anyway)?
I think the real point (to me) is the fact that the team can be better overall with Ichiro playing in CF, rather than with him playing in RF. Ichiro’s statistics are akin to those of a CF rather than a RF. And, as someone else previously stated, it’s much easier to get a masher for RF and move Ichiro to CF (rather than keep Ichiro in RF and hope to get a Jim Edmonds in his prime type in CF).
Do I think that having him play in CF plays to his defensive strengths? Not necessarily. He’s getting older and his foot speed is starting to decline (albeit slightly) and I think his arm could help us more in RF as this seems to the be place where a lot of OF’s rack up their OF assists and can help keep runners at bay. That said, I don’t think that having Ichiro in CF is a disaster. Overall, I think it’s a plus.
Now, if we come to find that Ichiro hits .280 this year because of the move to CF (as a result of the additional wear and tear that CF requires), I may be singing a different tune.
Well, I think the real question is, what’s an appropriate response to either statement. “Why not?” is pretty good, don’t you think? “What do you mean?” isn’t bad, either. “How would you evaluate him as a center fielder?” is another.
The purpose of my statement was simply to express, in a public forum, that this fan has really enjoyed watching him play, wouldn’t boo if he came back here in a different uniform, and enjoys watching him play right field more than left.
And I do appreciate your further engagement.
– Frankly, I don’t at this point care at all if you think I’m putting my best foot forward.
dmz, maybe it isn’t that you should care what I think, but that you should write things that don’t embarrass you.
I did not trot out the “Ahhh, the ‘people who don’t agree with me don’t watch games’ argument. Nice.” I didn’t say anything along the lines of “you’re coming across as a dick,” which, I’m sure you’ll admit, is a dicky thing to say.
I was told that this was “the Intelligent Mariners’ Fan Site,” and while I don’t doubt that it true, I am surprised by the tone of people like you, who I would think would be welcoming new posters who, at the very least, would be an audience for your own postings.
– – – – – – – – – – –
I agree with AQ’s timely post above. But I had a different purpose in posting, something different that I wanted published, and, like I say, surprised at the completely inappropriate response to it that some of you have voiced.
Well, you’ve answered my questions now. Thanks.
1. mack wants Ichiro to play right field again because he was “pained to see balls hit over his head when he was learning the job.â€
2. I could be wrong, but I’m guessing that mack also likes to watch the Mariners win. (Because God knows he is watching the games.)
3. Overwhelming evidence suggests that the Mariners can increase their chances of winning games by playing Ichiro in center.
So, it’s obvious that winning isn’t everything when it comes to mack enjoying his M’s baseball. I don’t see a problem with that.
Me? I love to watch Ichiro play defense. Ichiro in center field = increased chances for him to play defense = increased happiness for me. I think it’s highly unlikely that Ichiro turns out to be a below average centerfielder.
We’re talking about defensive metrics….right
a haiku:
Size matters to me
I must troll to compensate
Ichiro! in right.
Great advice…. really, it is….. really
cross making up for the earlier missed opportunity off the list..
and sometimes a troll really is, just a troll.
well of course, that’s the whole idea of trolling isn’t it?
I just heard from mack’s agent…he entirely denies that his comments were as reported in post 36.
I literally can’t think of anything to say better than the weird discourse that has already occurred here.
I guess I will say that I enjoyed watching Ichiro throw guys out at home from right field. Not as easy from center.
But really, does it matter that much? I’m feeling a lot of angst on here today and I just want to say, on MLK day, in homage to Rodney King “can’t we all just get along?”
Well, mack, in all honesty I’d have asked the evaluation question if you hadn’t (perhaps inadvertantly) discouraged the analysis option, as it were. I love looking at defense, whether it be from the metric side or the ‘just watch them play’ side, and would be more than happy to engage in a discussion with regards to Ichrio in centre field.
However, the message that you put across did not foster such a dialogue.
It’s just bizarre that someone would bring up Rodney King and MLK in the same sentence.
Really no more bizarre than the “who’s the troll?” and “who’s being dicky?” debate that currently dominates this discussion.
No, that debate is childish, not bizarre. The “troll” stuff is just an easy fallback when someone doesn’t want to or can’t debate the subject that is being discussed. Unfortunately, that’s always going to happen in a debate about Ichiro, because some people can’t have a discussion about Ichiro without being overcome with emotion.
Man, I loves me a good trainwreck.
/* sits back, opens beer, waits, thinks kind thoughts about moderators
Actually both of those issues were already decided…
Truth be told, the Ms are dead to me….i’m in a snarky mood mostly because BP hasn’t updated their Peota projections yet… I’m sure it’s Hargrove’s fault…
BTW, can managers be traded?
Sure. We did it with Lou.
BTW, can managers be traded?
If Bavasi traded Snelling and Fruto for Vidro, what are the odds he’d be able to make a deal for Hargrove that would net the Mariners anything more than a bag of BP balls and a few old ticket stubs?
Yes, but that wasn’t really a trade in the way players are dealt (though in a practical sense its probably just arguing semantics). Didn’t the Rays basically compensate the Ms for releasing Lou from his contract? I know the Rays probably worked out contractual details with Tampa beforehand but couldn’t he have theorectically told the Rays to stick it and then go somewhere else?
#84: I’d settle for a bobblehead of Earl Weaver in return… 🙂
Hargrove for a bag of BP balls and old ticket stubs?
Who wouldn’t take that deal? Really.
Who wouldn’t take that deal? Really.
Bavasi?
Are comments about trading Hargrove for ticket stubs or bobbleheads childish or bizarre?
Not really but…
this would trully be bizarre….
Are comments about trading Hargrove for ticket stubs or bobbleheads childish or bizarre?
Bizarre, perhaps. It’s not exactly a commonplace situation overall. Childish? If you can pick up a scrapheap manager from somewhere and improve your team while getting something, albeit minor, in return for your current manager, I think that’s a good decision. I don’t see how it’s childish to point that out.
I’d have to go look at the details of the transaction, but I believe that because of some of the weirdness around his contract, the Devil Rays didn’t so much acquire a Lou Piniella contract as they acquired the rights to negotiate with him, which the M’s held, and the deal was contingent on their ability to reach an agreement… which they did.
Now, the part I really don’t remember is what rights the M’s held at the time of the trade to Piniella’s contract, and whether that was contractual in the deal they signed, or something else.
Yeah, Piniella had a year left on his M’s contract at the time. They traded a manager. (PI)
Are comments about trading Hargrove for ticket stubs or bobbleheads childish or bizarre?
I prefer inane, thank you.
Wow, you guys sure were wound up tighter than an old-timey watch mainspring yesterday. I just got back from a week’s vacation, and I felt my neck and shoulder muscles tightening back up just reading this thread…
I’d suggest a vacation for each and everyone of you, hopefully to occupy your time between now and a month from now, when P/C report.
Then we’ll have a whole raft of new things to complain about, presumably.