philliesphhan wrote:Missenelli should have just stuck with his "chicks dig the long ball" argument. People pay money to see home runs. Ryan Howard hits lots of home runs, so lots of people pay money to see that.

Some player who saves runs with his glove at first may be "worth" more to the team, but if I go to a game with my dad, he wants to see a Phillie like Howard hit a mammoth HR, not see someone make a boring defensive play at first.

Good job Howard makes exciting plays at first too eh?

etched Chaos wrote:

philliesphhan wrote:Missenelli should have just stuck with his "chicks dig the long ball" argument. People pay money to see home runs. Ryan Howard hits lots of home runs, so lots of people pay money to see that.

Some player who saves runs with his glove at first may be "worth" more to the team, but if I go to a game with my dad, he wants to see a Phillie like Howard hit a mammoth HR, not see someone make a boring defensive play at first.

Good job Howard makes exciting plays at first too eh?

Not to mention Howard makes every throw "exciting"

I think we need the man of robotic contradictions to settle this.

philliesphhan wrote:Missenelli should have just stuck with his "chicks dig the long ball" argument. People pay money to see home runs. Ryan Howard hits lots of home runs, so lots of people pay money to see that.

Some player who saves runs with his glove at first may be "worth" more to the team, but if I go to a game with my dad, he wants to see a Phillie like Howard hit a mammoth HR, not see someone make a boring defensive play at first.

I think this is a fair point. Law's argument is based solely on what leads to baseball wins as if winning is the only reason why people buy tickets. Danica Patrick is a below average driver as race car drivers go but she sells tickets. Its conceivable that a player like Ryan Howard might contribute more to attendance than merely to winning ballgames and that other teams (who are also in the business of selling tickets) might value him accordingly.

SQUIRE

Woody wrote:If we define power using slugging percentage, Howard is third to Poo and Manny

I'm sorry, but I don't remember Babe Ruth hitting 714 slugging perwhoosits.

Squire wrote: Danica Patrick is a below average driver as race car drivers go but she sells tickets. Its conceivable that a player like Ryan Howard might contribute more to attendance than merely to winning ballgames and that other teams (who are also in the business of selling tickets) might value him accordingly.

SQUIRE

Howard brings the $5 footlongs

ek wrote:http://www.cbssports.com/columns/story/13319072/leave-it-to-the-fools-to-question-howards-extension?tag=pageRow;pageContainer

I like how he uses a 0 before the decimal point in OPS.

Also, I'm not sure I can get through all of this. This is terrible.

HOLY SHIT

Alex Rodriguez isn't a winner, which is why he left Seattle after a 91-win season in 2000 for the Rangers. A-Rod is a capitalist. Werth is a winner. Big difference.

I wish FJM were still around in times like these. I mean, really.

Squire wrote:

philliesphhan wrote:Missenelli should have just stuck with his "chicks dig the long ball" argument. People pay money to see home runs. Ryan Howard hits lots of home runs, so lots of people pay money to see that.

Some player who saves runs with his glove at first may be "worth" more to the team, but if I go to a game with my dad, he wants to see a Phillie like Howard hit a mammoth HR, not see someone make a boring defensive play at first.

I think this is a fair point. Law's argument is based solely on what leads to baseball wins as if winning is the only reason why people buy tickets. Danica Patrick is a below average driver as race car drivers go but she sells tickets. Its conceivable that a player like Ryan Howard might contribute more to attendance than merely to winning ballgames and that other teams (who are also in the business of selling tickets) might value him accordingly.

SQUIRE

Yeah, but does Howard have a rack and ass like Danica?

Sorry, it was rude of me to provide SARB's with my argument. So here it is....

ek wrote:http://www.cbssports.com/columns/story/13319072/leave-it-to-the-fools-to-question-howards-extension?tag=pageRow;pageContainer

Winners don't leave winners. Alex Rodriguez isn't a winner, which is why he left Seattle after a 91-win season in 2000 for the Rangers.

A-Rod is a capitalist. Werth is a winner. Big difference.

dude's good. winner is the new gritty. capitalist the new blobfish.

I just listened to the crap between the Philliy radio guy and Law. Jeez. Neither one did much to advance the conversation. Neither could seem to get past the preeminent slugger nonsense. The radio guy' job would have been to do so if that was the intent of the interview. Obviously it wasn't.

The radio guy knew Law didn't like the contract extension and radio guy had made up his mind that Howard was worth the money because he hits a lot of homers and drove in a lot of runs and was gonna use the term preeminent slugger in baseball come hell or high water.

Neither guy was doing much listening. The radio guy was worse. I guess that's his shtick. It's Law's shtick as well to a great degree so I really didn't feel much sympathy for him. Both guys were bad -- the radio guy worse. but I guess that's how these things are supposed to work.

For those who haven't heard it yet, here's a summary:

Hi Keith.

Hi.

Howard is the preeminent slugger in baseball and is worth 25 million bucks.

That's ridiculous. What does preeminent slugger mean.

There's Sammy Sosa the Juicer and Babe Ruth and Howard -- he's historic -- blah. blah, blah.

Howard is no Jesus Montero.

Jesus Montero? You're stupid.

No, you're stupid.

G'bye Keith.

Uh huh.

I guess this is what sports talk interviews are supposed to be and on that level it succeeded brilliantly.

Missanelli is a completely unlikable douchebag and represents everything that's wrong with sports radio. He's only interested in trying to be controversial and impress his moronic listeners, unlike Law who seemed to be trying to have a real debate. I don't see how Law did anything wrong there.

bleh wrote:Missanelli is a completely unlikable douchebag and represents everything that's wrong with sports radio. He's only interested in trying to be controversial and impress his moronic listeners, unlike Law who seemed to be trying to have a real debate. I don't see how Law did anything wrong there.

Well, Law does the same kinda thing with his douchy answers on his chats or whatever they are that get quoted here so I expected him to handle this a bit better.

Regardless, he could have tried to get past the preeminent slugger crap and addressed something else. To be fair, it's very likely the radio guy would not let go of it anyway.

Actually, Law's best move would have been to treat the "interview" with the seriousness it deserved but it might be he had no idea how much of a clown the radio guy is.

Well, Law was more rational and reserved than I had gathered from the comments here, and continued to put forth good arguments in the face of ridicule for quite a while. Ultimately he let Missanelli take control of the interview and looked a bit small, but when it's the other guy's show and the other guy is a blowhard who's already decided how the conversation is going to go that's hard to avoid. Too bad, it could have been an informative interview, maybe even from both sides.

I haven't listened, and probably won't. I really dislike Eskinelli.

The day a Philly sports radio station employs a guy who likes AND understands baseball, I'll tune in. But that day hasn't happened.

I think the simplest argument is: 1) How many players would you trade Howard for? and 2) How many players "deserve" $25M/year? If 1 is more than 2, it's a bad deal.

The problem with that approach is that Missanelli couldn't think of 3 players he'd trade Howard for. He likely couldn't name 100 major leaguers.

he said preeminent slugger about 15 times and in doing so sounded like a dope.

SABRmetrics really could benefit from a brand makeover

The SABR community missed there chance a few years ago during the national pirate craze. Imagine a Jolly Roger with crossed saber and slide rule.

Woody wrote:SABRmetrics really could benefit from a brand makeover

Spearheaded by ZWR and Brent Celek's midwestern sensibilities.

That doesn't even make any sense

bleh wrote:Missanelli is a completely unlikable douchebag and represents everything that's wrong with sports radio.

I thought that was Eskin.