Eight years into his career, it's still difficult to find the proper perspective through which to view the man who at one point was cast as a franchise's savior. On one hand are his 218 career home runs, fifth in Phillies history. By the end of the year, he'll likely move back Greg Luzinski (223) and Chuck Klein (243).

On the other hand are his .258 career average and numerous injuries.

In 2002, the year before he signed a 6-year contract extension that will earn him $14 million this year, he hit .282 with 37 home runs and 116 RBI. The following year, those numbers plummeted to .209, 21 and 64.

Only once has his batting average improved in two straight seasons (from .209 to .257 to .281 from 2003-05). After hitting .281 with 32 home runs and 117 RBI in 2005, his batting average dropped to .258 in 2006 and .256 last year.

It’s become fashionable amongst statheads to dismiss the RBI as useless. This view has become so commonplace, such unanimous dogma… you would think we should do away with it altogether. If a guy knocks in three runs in a game, he should be more concerned with the state of his OPS, and not celebrating.

Statheads love to rip Joe Morgan, a longtime proponent of the RBI… and hall of fame player. He contributed significantly to championship clubs. Morgan’s a hall of fame PLAYER and not a geek studying fictional numbers with no relationship to winning baseball games. He may have completely ###### up in criticizing Billy Beane for ‘writing Moneyball’, which Beane obviously didn’t do… but he’s not wrong about the RBI… or which teams win in the postseason… teams that can manufacture runs.

[...]

CrashburnAlley wrote:The Bad News Cubs: The Great RBI Statistic

It’s become fashionable amongst statheads to dismiss the RBI as useless. This view has become so commonplace, such unanimous dogma… you would think we should do away with it altogether. If a guy knocks in three runs in a game, he should be more concerned with the state of his OPS, and not celebrating.Statheads love to rip Joe Morgan, a longtime proponent of the RBI… and hall of fame player. He contributed significantly to championship clubs. Morgan’s a hall of fame PLAYER and not a geek studying fictional numbers with no relationship to winning baseball games. He may have completely ###### up in criticizing Billy Beane for ‘writing Moneyball’, which Beane obviously didn’t do… but he’s not wrong about the RBI… or which teams win in the postseason… teams that can manufacture runs. [...]

Houshphandzadeh wrote:The whole "geek" thing is so funny. Do they think we're all playing World of Warcraft (NTTAWTH) from 6-12 then reading Baseball Prospectus for a few hours before bedtime? Are there any dudes like that?

Houshphandzadeh wrote:The whole "geek" thing is so funny.  Do they think we're all playing World of Warcraft (NTTAWTH) from 6-12 then reading Baseball Prospectus for a few hours before bedtime?  Are there any dudes like that?

CrashburnAlley wrote:The other assumption is that being a nerd is a bad thing. Aren't nerds, uh, smart?

And what's the alternative? Casual Joe who has a basic knowledge of the game?

Dominique Brown is tall and skinny at 6-foot-5, 205. He bats and throws left, plays a mean right field and has an arm that scares baserunners. And best of all, this kid hits baseballs a long, long way.

The group is headed by Brown and includes former No. 1 pick Greg Golson, D'Arby Myers, Matt Spencer and 2007 Paul Owens winner Quinton Berry.

MarkdlV wrote:From Randy Miller's article today:

Dominique Brown is tall and skinny at 6-foot-5, 205. He bats and throws left, plays a mean right field and has an arm that scares baserunners. And best of all, this kid hits baseballs a long, long way.

I assume he was talking about Dominic Brown?

The group is headed by Brown and includes former No. 1 pick Greg Golson, D'Arby Myers, Matt Spencer and 2007 Paul Owens winner Quinton Berry.

Maybe it's a typo or maybe Miller didn't bother to figure out how to spell his name.

The Padres might not be preseason favorites in the National League West, but they'd wipe the floor with all comers in 2-on-2 hoops.

Padres starter Chris Young, 6-foot-10, was a basketball star at Princeton whose career highlights included a 24-point performance against North Carolina State in the NIT and a 20-point game against a ranked Kansas squad.

Tony Clark, who recently signed a one-year deal to back up Adrian Gonzalez at first base, averaged 43.7 points a game as a senior at Christian High School in El Cajon, Calif., and played college hoops for Arizona and San Diego State.

"I've got to think with Tony here, that puts us right up there,'' Young said. "We'd do some pick-and-roll stuff. He played the 2- or the 3-guard, so he could handle the rock. He's too humble to talk about it, but I have some friends in San Diego who say he's the best high school basketball player they've ever seen. Hands down. Not even close.''

Young said he won't be surprised if manager Bud Black arranges a team free-throw shooting contest for kicks this spring. But don't expect anything more strenuous or hazardous than that.
-- Jerry Crasnick, ESPN.com

Even so, I wasn't shocked that stats people have taken issue with Rollins winning the MVP award. There are numbers crunchers out there -- including a firejoemorgan.com author who wrote a guest piece in Sports Illustrated last week -- who believe baseball writers rank somewhere between morons and idiots for voting Rollins as MVP over David Wright, who had a higher VORP. The stat people seem to believe VORP -- a Baseball Prospectus statistic that stands for Value Over Replacement Player -- defines a player, but why haven't many of them championed last year's VORP leader (Hanley Ramirez) as MVP instead?

I assume the stats guys favor Wright because he played for a contending team. I guess the rule is this: Highest VORP wins unless the VORP champion is playing for a loser.

If Wright's offensive stats were slightly better than Rollins', and I will accept that they were, especially considering the respective ballparks they play in (VORP accounts for ballparks), shouldn't Rollins get points for playing a superb shortstop compared to Wright's slightly-above average third base? And shouldn't Rollins get credit for showing extraordinary initiative and leadership? For helping his team barrel into the playoffs from seven games back with 17 to go, as opposed to Wright's team, which perpetrated a historic choke?

Though the Mets' collapse was no fault of Wright's, for the MVP to come off the all-time choke team, he'd better have a greater advantage in stats than this: Wright outhit Rollins .325 to .296, but both hit 30 home runs and Rollins beat Wright in Runs Created by 13. Wright's big advantage apparently comes down to the fact he got on base more often (his on-base percentage was significantly higher, .416 to .344), usually via a walk (he had 94 walks to Rollins' 49). To the stat guys, walking is more thrilling and much more valuable than actually winning the pennant.