tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-102327997051254703.post7785233016894401053..comments2023-10-31T06:31:41.395-04:00Comments on Bottom of the Barrel: Tim Smith Thinks Ruben Tejada > Jose ReyesBengoodfellahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09401971573776672570noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-102327997051254703.post-16006472837002059482012-04-30T08:33:01.886-04:002012-04-30T08:33:01.886-04:00Rich, I am changing things up a bit at times now. ...Rich, I am changing things up a bit at times now. Just to keep everyone off guard! <br /><br />How dare you call a 28 year old QB a "reach." Weeden was a brilliant pick. Brilliant. Not only did he play in a QB friendly offense in college, but he is also older than your average rookie QB. Who can beat that. <br /><br />What I was saying is Tejada is capable of hitting .246/.324/.361, so that is him not being cold. When he gets cold though, what is he going to hit? I think I was being fair, I was merely trying to point out Tejada doesn't tear the cover off the ball right now and if he takes a step down is he going to be hitting .220/.310/.349 or something? So I didn't mean to indicate he was slumping now, I was saying when he does slump he is going to be even worse at the plate. <br /><br />I can see your Howard comparison pretty well. All things being equal, the Phillies are better off with Howard, but they aren't equal. What I am saying is Reyes is slumping and Tejada is hitting around the point where he is projected to be hitting for this year based on his past numbers. Once Reyes gets going, which he should do, he will probably surpass Tejada's stats. <br /><br />My larger point was that Tejada and Reyes aren't even similar players, so they shouldn't be compared. Reyes is a natural leadoff hitter, which Tejada isn't currently a natural leadoff hitter. They are just two different players, so directly comparing them and saying the Mets are better off without Reyes over Tejada b/c he isn't on par with Reyes. <br /><br />The Marlins wish Reyes was 22...Bengoodfellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09401971573776672570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-102327997051254703.post-70331782866432423492012-04-30T01:23:10.730-04:002012-04-30T01:23:10.730-04:00And by "Reyes is 22" I meant "Tejad...And by "Reyes is 22" I meant "Tejada is 22"<br /><br />Screw you beer and NHL Playoff games.richnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-102327997051254703.post-34917544027236415592012-04-30T01:21:28.275-04:002012-04-30T01:21:28.275-04:00A Sunday post!?!?
First, clearly NFL teams heeded...A Sunday post!?!?<br /><br />First, clearly NFL teams heeded TMQ's advice to get a QB because two teams reached for them in the first round.<br /><br />Nevermind that the position that teams most often reach for is QB, NFL teams just don't get it like TMQ.<br /><br /><b>They’re better off without him. </b><br /><br /><i>No, the Mets are not better without Jose Reyes. They are better off not having to pay his contract, but they aren't better off without Reyes in the lineup.</i><br /><br />I think Smith's point is valid, he makes the distinction between "better" and "better off." The Mets are better off for a plethora of reasons (money, consistent lineup without Reyes' continual injuries, etc), but they are not a better baseball team.<br /><br />It's like Howard. Due to his absurd contract, the Phillies are better off without him. However, this Phillies team is instantly better with him.<br /><br />That said, the reasons they are better off have nothing to do with Tejada being an exceeding mediocre baseball player and so while Smith's contention is valid, the reasons he makes it are dumber than dirt.<br /><br /><i>"When Tejada slumps?" He was hitting .246/.324/.361 as of the day Tim Smith wrote this article.</i><br /><br />To be fair, it's not a slump if that's about what he's capable of (not that it makes it any better).<br /><br />But... then again Reyes is hitting like .220.<br /><br />Still kind of on Smith's side - he's saying that Tejada has played "well enough" to soften the blow. Which may be overly optimistic, but sure.<br /><br /><b>And then he will continue trying to play well enough to beat the Marlins and put some distance between himself and the Reyes</b><br /><br />And all the goodwill he had managed to store up is lost. <br /><br />He's not playing well enough to beat anyone, he's barely playing well enough to be on a fucking MLB roster, let alone put "distance" b/w he and Reyes. He's not Reyes and he never will be.<br /><br />Had the article been "Mets better off with Tejada" and talked about saving money for Wright, getting the young guys more playing time and ultimately how Reyes' injury concerns hurt the team (regardless of his contract), I would have agreed.<br /><br />Hell, even saying that Reyes is 22 and isn't a complete shitshow at the plate is something I could stand behind. <br /><br />But to say that Tejada is "putting distance" between himself and Reyes is one of the most incredibly insulting things I've ever read. Reyes has more talent and production than Tejada and this fact is undeniable. <br /><br />If you want to look at Tejada in a vacuum, you can justify that he allowed the Mets to let Reyes go and that the Mets are better off for it. I actually think you can make this point.<br /><br />To, mindnumbingly, compare the two players and say "see, the Mets are better off" is not a point you can make. Reyes is a better baseball player and you cannot make the argument that Tejada is playing on par or, even more indefensible, better than Reyes is/will be.<br /><br />The Mets are better off without Reyes, but they'd probably be better off without Tejada too.richnoreply@blogger.com