JFLNYC wrote:What a pity you waited so patiently for what you thought was the exact the moment you were right -- only to be wrong. I said "Burrell's better," not "Burrell's a better hitter."

Burrell's VORP is 38.1; Manny 35.6. Burrell has 19 Win Shares; Manny 15. Burrell's WARP3 9.1; Manny 8.4. By any measure which includes totality of play, not just hitting, Burrell is better than Manny this year.

That must hurt. Thanks for playing and better luck next time.

Not really. Burrell had a better first half of the season than Manny. All that would matter in this debate is the stats after Manny has been traded. If we had traded Burrell for Manny, Manny would have given us MUCH more production than Burrell in the half year he was here. And in this situation, a half year is all that matters. So take a look at those stats at the end of the year, and the OPS+ is the most important stat when judging a player. The others are in context with the team, and not solely the individual. Either way, the end of the season will judge whether or not Manny would have been more productive than Burrell

try again.

You brought up a large sample size in regards to career v career, you pishaw the year v year comparison and now you switch to a week v week small sample size to try to prove your point. interesting, is all.

Burrells eqa - .323

Mannys eqa - .305

philliesr98 wrote:Burrells eqa - .323

Mannys eqa - .305

No no, the OPS+ is the most important stat when judging a player.

phatj wrote:

philliesr98 wrote:Burrells eqa - .323

Mannys eqa - .305

No no, the OPS+ is the most important stat when judging a player.

phew... thanks for the reminder

It explains why Milton Bradley is the best player in the AL this year.

Obviously the performance of the two players in the final 2 months of the season is all that would matter in terms of whether it would be a good deal for the Phillies. Neither one would return next year, atleast I don't think. I do think that Manny's stats will continue to improve and Burrell's will decline the rest of this season.

The offense has sucked for a while. So you want to take one of their top weapons off the team and replace him with Manny. Still not much sense to that. The only point to adding Manny would have been to add him to the Burrell/Utley/Howard core.

ReadingPhilly wrote:The offense has sucked for a while. So you want to take one of their top weapons off the team and replace him with Manny. Still not much sense to that. The only point to adding Manny would have been to add him to the Burrell/Utley/Howard core.

The guy probably would have won us this game tonight.

you probably have a small schlong

WHEELIE

McGraw has stepped up his game lately. He just needed Stu to leave so he could emerge as a leader.

You're arguing a point about something you think might happen, not something that happened and showing evidence for your reasoning or anything like that. You're just saying 'look at the last week how right I am on how well they'll do the next 2 months!! LOLZ YOU WERE ALL WRONG!!!' when everyone else is comparing how similar they've been in regards to offensive output this year and how Burrell's actually been slightly better thus far.
One thing is truthiness that one feels in their gut, the other thing is fact-based.

JDS wrote:

ReadingPhilly wrote:The offense has sucked for a while. So you want to take one of their top weapons off the team and replace him with Manny. Still not much sense to that. The only point to adding Manny would have been to add him to the Burrell/Utley/Howard core.

The guy probably would have won us this game tonight.

Manny was 0 for 5 last night. That would have been a big help.

philliesphhan wrote:

JDS wrote:

ReadingPhilly wrote:The offense has sucked for a while. So you want to take one of their top weapons off the team and replace him with Manny. Still not much sense to that. The only point to adding Manny would have been to add him to the Burrell/Utley/Howard core.

The guy probably would have won us this game tonight.

Manny was 0 for 5 last night. That would have been a big help.

He would've been facing Maholm, who right handers have crushed this year.

Burrell has had a career year thus far and Manny one of his worst first halves of the year, playing on a team where he felt he was not wanted. Think that had an effect on him? Just look at his stats with the Dodgers. Another 2 for 2 night tonight, and his OPS has been rising drastically.

If the Phillies traded Burrell for Manny, he would have given us more production than Burrell in the 2 months that he was on the Phillies. Sure, Burrell had a better first half. he's not going to duplicate that, and Manny isn't duplicating his sub-par (for him) first half. It would have been a great trade for the Philadelphia Phillies, is all I'm saying

JDS wrote:

philliesphhan wrote:

JDS wrote:

ReadingPhilly wrote:The offense has sucked for a while. So you want to take one of their top weapons off the team and replace him with Manny. Still not much sense to that. The only point to adding Manny would have been to add him to the Burrell/Utley/Howard core.

The guy probably would have won us this game tonight.

Manny was 0 for 5 last night. That would have been a big help.

He would've been facing Maholm, who right handers have crushed this year.

Burrell has had a career year thus far and Manny one of his worst first halves of the year, playing on a team where he felt he was not wanted. Think that had an effect on him? Just look at his stats with the Dodgers. Another 2 for 2 night tonight, and his OPS has been rising drastically.

If the Phillies traded Burrell for Manny, he would have given us more production than Burrell in the 2 months that he was on the Phillies. Sure, Burrell had a better first half. he's not going to duplicate that, and Manny isn't duplicating his sub-par (for him) first half. It would have been a great trade for the Philadelphia Phillies, is all I'm saying

Burrell has a full no trade clause, which he most likely would have invoked, just like he did when the Phils wanted to trade him two years ago. And it's doubtful Boston would have swapped one two month rental for another (Bay, the replacement Boston wanted, is under contract through 2009). Also, the only way a team moves production like Burrell's (even for similar or slightly better current production) is if they are sellers, not buyers. So why pine for something that wouldn't have happened?

Sure, Manny has had a superior career than Burrell (Manny's a 1st ballot HOF'er). But how soon we forget that Burrell practically carried the team for a couple of months last season, which without, the Phils don't make the playoffs. And he's played an integral part in the Phils offense this season. If you were arguing adding Manny to an OF of Burrell and Vic (with either Burrell or Manny moving to RF), inficating that the Phils were buyers and not sellers, I'm sure many (if not most) Phillies phans would agree (even with the drop in defense it would entail). But to argue a Manny for Burrell swap in the heat of a division race is just asinine. Why risk @#%!ing up team chemistry?

Manny always has been and still is a better hitter than Burrell. It still wouldn't have made any sense for the Phillies to make that trade from a rational perspective. Manny being Manny does come into play even though Manny being Manny is probably one of the top 10 hitters of all time.

The trade would've been great for the Red Sox, but for us it could've blown up right in our faces. The only way trading for Manny would have made sense for the Phillies is if it could have been done without losing any of the core hitters. If we could have done Happ+( insert pretty much any other minor leaguer) it would have been better than straight up for Burrell. It also would have possibly put us over the top.

Jason Bay is just as good as Burrell and the Pirates are in a completely different situation than we are. We don't want to make what could possibly be a lateral move if it means taking on the extra baggage. If he could have been added, baggage and all, to our offense that is in need of help(Burrell is clearly not the problem) it would have been wise.

It pisses me off because it could have been done.

JDS wrote:

philliesphhan wrote:

JDS wrote:

ReadingPhilly wrote:The offense has sucked for a while. So you want to take one of their top weapons off the team and replace him with Manny. Still not much sense to that. The only point to adding Manny would have been to add him to the Burrell/Utley/Howard core.

The guy probably would have won us this game tonight.

Manny was 0 for 5 last night. That would have been a big help.

He would've been facing Maholm, who right handers have crushed this year.

Manny has a .765 OPS vs lefties this year

bump

we should stage a rally to promote awareness.