That’s just incredibly short sighted.

Now you’re just being ridiculous. Carlos Beltran is one of the best all around players in baseball; he doesn’t have any glaring weaknesses.

Beltran has been huge for the Mets down the stretch the past two seasons. Just because you don’t get a warm feeling in your tummy when he comes to the plate doesn’t mean he isn’t a dangerous hitter.

Beltran is the exact type of player you would want up in a clutch situation because you know he is less likely to do something stupid like “expand his zone” and roll over some fringe strike and ground out to second.

for giving me a great idea for a post. Here’s a little preview:

Beltran, in high leverage situations (LI greater than 1.5 AKA “clutch” situations)
2008: .311/.404/.545
2007: .264/.349/.506
2006: .304/.443/.595

“glaring weakness”

I understand what you’re saying, but you’re completely wrong.

I agree with Prince, you don’t love Beltran. It’s obvious you have something against the guy.

Baseball is a game of failure, so you would expect Beltran to fail more often than he succeeds in clutch situations. I’m pretty sure if you looked up other players who you “believe” to be clutch you would fine the same thing.

He’s got 4 years of time with the Mets. Yes, he’s had some clutch hits.

I just went over the last month of last season, I’m sure there’s plenty more.

Next thing you’ll do is point out some little thing Bush did and say that means he’s our greatest leader everest.

Liking Beltran = I’m an apologist republican that has terrible grammer (everest?)

You made a statement, I countered with actual data. You countered with some weird attack at me.

Beltran career OPS .853, career with Runners on .910, career RISP .919, RISP w/2 outs .825, career bases loaded .982.
For comparison’s sake, Captain Clutch
Jeter career OPS .845, career with Runners on .836, career RISP .839, RISP w/2 outs .867, career bases loaded .864.

Point is, with sample size issues, I doubt these variances are significant so “clutch” doesn’t matter. But if you want to argue it does matter, Beltran has outclutched Jeter overall with Jeter performing better with RISP w/2 outs, so I guess you can argue this is Beltran’s flaw and ignore sample size issues and the fact that Beltran is better than Jeter in every other clutch category.

And by the way, I voted for Kodos.

So would evryone, but it doesn’t work that way. Victorino wouldn’t make your team better than Beltran does, so it’s ridiculous to use that comparison.

Complain about the Mets’ failures, that’s fine. Don’t complain about Beltran, that’s lunacy.

And you have four of the top 15-20 or so best players in baseball at worst. Go right ahead and applaud their success. If you’d rather win that’s fine, I’m sure everyone would. But that doesn’t mean you have to pretend Beltran isn’t great. Instead, attack the organization and the players who aren’t great and recognize the guys who are great as great.

just ask sonic the hedgehog.

this championship or nothing argument is fine for comparing tams but its totally meaningless when comparing players, especially two players who play the same position.

The Mets have not won a ring, Beltran has been on the team.

Note the lack of “because.” If Jeter was surrounded by three great players and a whole lot of below average, he probably wouldn’t have won any rings. If Beltran was surrounded by a top notch organization with no worse than solid players from top to bottom, he probably would have some rings. That’s the way baseball works, if you didn’t know: a player is a cog in a machine and no player is single-handedly responsible for success or failure.

Stop using TEAM success to define how good an INDIVIDUAL is. Beltran is not in the front office and neither is Jeter. They are responsible for what they do with their plate appearances and in the field, not what the other players do.

If you use rings to define players, you’re insane. Players should be defined by what they have controll over. Just because other stupid people define players by something they have little control over doesn’t mean you should. Do you always let dumb people determine your thoughts for you? Are you incapable of thinking critically for yourself?

Beltran was on the Royals the beginning of his career. Captain Clutch has always been on the team with the highest payroll in baseball. So I’d sincerely hope Jeter has more rings. And Bernie Williams has way more rings than Beltran. But Beltran is significantly better.

a team wins by acquiring the best players. the stats tell us who are the best players. unfortunately, there’s no simple formula that translates individual stats into team wins. the best we can do is hope the mets field the best players they possibly can at each position.

so, if you care about the team winning, you should care about the stats. WS rings only tells us which players we’re lucky enough to be on winning teams. it tells us nothing about their contributions to the team.

Well then. . .

Wait, wait, wait. . . do you think Mets fans enjoying how good a few of their players are stops the front office from building a good supporting cast? You think these people have some influence on the front office?

Nevermind your original point was basically that a person can’t judge players by stats that you haven’t bothered to understand, you should instead judge them by how their team does. . .

With the Phils being around twice as long. Just to clarify.

Because, by the logic you’ve shown, he’s correct: you must think Williams wasn’t great.

By your definition, Pedro Feliz>David Wright. And that makes you stupid.

then unfortunately i dont think youre going to enjoy this website much. at least until we win another one.

Which means you think everyone is so stupid they thing a handful of great players makes up for a bad team.

You’re ridiculous. People can analyze the team using statistics because it tells them a whole lot AND want the Mets to win. Why is that a tough concept for you?

:)