But even with a season that was a slight disappointment, you couldn’t get his performance from a “proven” MLB player for 5x the price, and probably not 15x the price (unless you shopped well). One cheap, decent player frees up a ton of money to buy a true star. When you start throwing away the guys who can make up the core of the team, without actually hurting the budget…well, there had better be a serious plan behind it.

Dave is a value fanboy. He believes in getting the best return on payroll investment, and using the savings to go after players that really deserve it. Young players generally offer most or all of the performance of veteran players, but they’re much cheaper. It’s as simple as that. If old players got cheaper (like they often should) Dave would be an “old player” fanboy (at least until they get so old they’re useless). But old players get more expensive (often when they also are getting close to useless).

But my point is, there is actual evidence that can be used to support the opinion that Jones is so-so. I’ve watched and played a ton of baseball in my life, and I don’t see from Jones what I’ve seen from other young players that go on to have productive careers (The “Brandon Roy Effect” or something). No way to quantify that, but I think we can all agree that there is something beyond number analysis. Meanwhile, his numbers when I’ve seen them (ie, with the M’s) don’t stand out.

So, you said you had some evidence….?

For the case of Adam Jones, not all prospects have the same basic qualities. In very rare cases does the prospect reach his potential (which can be debated, and has been, and I won’t argue against the case that has been made a bazillion times already).

The analogy used in this case does not work.

Personally, I don’t care whether we have Jones or Bedard on our roster. They are both going to be fun to watch and will improve our team either way. And who knows, we may be able to retain Bedard for more than 2 years. His price isn’t that big of an issue as Ibanez, Sexson, Beltre, Vidro, Washburn, and Batista come off the books by the end of the 2009 season. We will have the cash to be able to re-sign Bedard and a solid outfielder. And by 2010, we may be able to raise up another Prophet among us.

my issue (as I see it) is that Dave believes that those who don’t think Jones is that great are willfully engaging in cognitive dissonance or in a best-case scenario, ignorant.

But my point is, there is actual evidence that can be used to support the opinion that Jones is so-so. I’ve watched and played a ton of baseball in my life, and I don’t see from Jones what I’ve seen from other young players that go on to have productive careers (The “Brandon Roy Effect” or something). No way to quantify that, but I think we can all agree that there is something beyond number analysis. Meanwhile, his numbers when I’ve seen them (ie, with the M’s) don’t stand out.

It is entirely realistic that informed, intelligent people can have a contrary opinion re:Jones. It would be nice USSM writers (and posters!) would not treat those with that opinion as if they were simply refusing to be rational: we’ve assembled a reasonable amount of evidence and come to our conclusion.

I also have noticed that Dave values young players very highly, moreso almost certainly than a majority of front offices or MSM sources. I feel like Dave is a young player fanboy. So this makes me discount Dave’s opinion somewhat. I don’t automatically assume that Jones sucks, or that gritty veteran X is awesome (Of all things, re-tread players and coaches are my most loathed), all I want to see are guys contribute to the MARINERS. Not the Aqua Sox, or Rainers, or 66′ers (are they still with us?), etc.

In reality, there have been about 50 words on this topic, they have just been written thousands of times.

Yes, that is the point. Well said.

Dave–did I offend you?