Dibble is dumb and random MLB debate Thread

[PCS]

There ya go Rob. Tell the kid how it was back in the days of tough guys who averaged what? 1 to 2 innings pitched per game? Go ahead on with your bad self, (this is not saying Rob wasn't fearsome for a time).

[TD_washingtonredskins]

It was perfectly relevant to Fancy's asanine claim that Dibble was a "bum". Try to keep up.

I've kept up...haven't we determined that Dibble's ability or accomplishments as a baseball player have nothing to do with Strasburg? If you guys want to start a thread on the career of Rob Dibble, feel free to post all the stats you want in there.

[Larry Brown #43]

Dibble is an idiot who needs to be fired. He acts like he was some superstar pitcher when he played, but he was a bum. I hope MASN fires him

Tell that to John Angelos...he's the one who hired him for the O's Broadcasting Netw... er, MASN.

...

As for the comments about Strasburg-- Dibble is only partly wrong. He’s wrong in the sense that this is really not up to Strasburg at all-- the organization is handling him with kid gloves to protect him. It’s the Nats’ investment, and they’re purposely being cautious with him. So that’s out of Strasburg’s hands.

But I understand somewhat where Dibble is coming from. Strasburg has shown himself to be very picky or particular about his pitching conditions—almost coming off as a bit of a diva. That start in (I believe) Cleveland early on was very weird. He couldn’t get comfortable with the dirt on the mound, and kept stepping on it and kicking at it. Yet the other pitchers didn’t seem to have any problems with the mound that day.

And now he’s had a couple of flare-ups of discomfort. You start to wonder if this is going to be the norm with him—only being able to pitch under perfect circumstances.

Dibble’s not completely off-base here, but he has to understand that a lot of this is in the organization’s hands, not Strasburg’s.

[Mufumonk]

There ya go Rob. Tell the kid how it was back in the days of tough guys who averaged what? 1 to 2 innings pitched per game? Go ahead on with your bad self, (this is not saying Rob wasn't fearsome for a time).

1 to 2 innings per appearance and STILL shredded his arm.

[Mufumonk]

Tell that to John Angelos...he's the one who hired him for the O's Broadcasting Netw... er, MASN.

...

As for the comments about Strasburg-- Dibble is only partly wrong. He’s wrong in the sense that this is really not up to Strasburg at all-- the organization is handling him with kid gloves to protect him. It’s the Nats’ investment, and they’re purposely being cautious with him. So that’s out of Strasburg’s hands.

But I understand somewhat where Dibble is coming from. Strasburg has shown himself to be very picky or particular about his pitching conditions—almost coming off as a bit of a diva. That start in (I believe) Cleveland early on was very weird. He couldn’t get comfortable with the dirt on the mound, and kept stepping on it and kicking at it. Yet the other pitchers didn’t seem to have any problems with the mound that day.

And now he’s had a couple of flare-ups of discomfort. You start to wonder if this is going to be the norm with him—only being able to pitch under perfect circumstances.

Dibble’s not completely off-base here, but he has to understand that a lot of this is in the organization’s hands, not Strasburg’s.

I actually explained why that was a problem.

When your toe/ball of your foot comes down it digs in leaving a sort of landing zone. If a lefty is landing in the same spot it changes the spot some. It can cause real issues if the other guy lands a little shorter/further than you do. Hence the slipping with Strasburg.

[Larry Brown #43]

I actually explained why that was a problem.

That's fine, and it may not have been any big deal. But the best pitchers find a way to battle through things like that. You'll rarely have perfect conditions to deal with. You've got to win with what you've got that day.

I'm a Nats fan and I want to see Strasburg dominate. I think he's a phenomenal talent. It just seems there's always something that bogs him down. That may smooth itself out as he matures.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Great article from Posnanski...kinda touches on Dibble at the end. http://joeposnanski.si.com/2010/08/24/all-too-familiar/?eref=sihp

[Drop]

Dibble's an idiot. Maybe Strasburg has a little hypochondriac in him. And if he does, so what? The kid is a rare specimen. And while all of his coaches, trainers, advisors, and other people of significance are telling him NOT to hide anything, and NOT to push through even a little bit of pain.....Dibble think's its smart to advise Strasburg to be a tough guy?

I heard about this on the radio yesterday and they were saying that it sounds like Dibble has some kind of inside info on the situation for him to come out with these comments like this, especially when he's been a big Strasburg supporter in the past.

Odds are, Dibble heard someone in the organization basically say, "the kid is fine, it's nothing major. they're just protecting their investment", and he decides to put on the John Wayne act.

I started my post this way, and i'll end it this way....Dibble's an idiot.

[pjfootballer]

Stras has only begun his career. Better to err on the side of caution. Washington is going nowhere and there is no way they should force the issue on their franchise pitcher. Dibble is an idiot.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

There are two little dirty secrets about baseball that no one ever wants to talk about:

1. Baseball players are the dumbest human beings on the planet.

2. Since most baseball executives are ex-baseball players, baseball executives are the dumbest human beings in position of authority on the planet.

It really only occured to baseball people about ten years ago, "Hey...We draft hundreds of young pitchers each year and about 80 percent of them develop arm problems that ruin their careers. Hmmmm....do you think we are doing something wrong? After all, throwing a baseball is about the most unnatural thing you can do with your arm. It is - by every definition - unhealthy to throw a baseball. Maybe we should examine this a little more closely."

So, they finally started experimenting with ways to slowly build up a pitcher's "tolerance."

And there are still idiots like Nolan Ryan and Dusty Baker and Rob Dibble who think that any idea that was not popular in 1922 is wrong.

"It was good enough for Nap Lajoie so it's good enough for me!"

[pjfootballer]

I could be long-winded, but suffice it to say...I think he had his strong points but I think his ego/chasing the streak hurt the Orioles in some ways.

Actually the thing that hurt the Orioles at the end of Ripken's career was Angelos owning the team.

You can say that the streak was good for the O's in that it brought exposure to a team who was bad. Ripken to me was never selfish. I'm sure he didn't go to the manager and lobby to be put in the lineup. Could he have stopped when he wasn't playing right? Sure, but what he gave to the game, you'd have to say the game owed him the right to be the one to stop the streak. And he did. Remember the all-star game when Jeter wanted him to play SS and he really didn't want to do it? He was all but forced (jokingly) to play SS in the all-star game. Selfless, not sellfish.

[pjfootballer]

Cooking. You are borderline tolerable on that subject.

By the way' date=' I feel like Ripken was a transitional/transformational player who was never quite as good as everyone said. He turned what was once a defensive position into an offensive position. But he was never quite the offensive force people seemed to think he was. And he stayed at SS far far far too long.[/quote']

He was an offensive force for shortstops at that time. Most shortstops were 5-7 and 175 lbs and hit less than 10 HRs and less than 50 RBI. Most were known for their gloves and feet (Ozzie, Templeton, etc.) then their bats. So, having that extra 25 HRs and 100 RBI was icing on the cake for a lineup.

[pjfootballer]

In the end, I think we basically agree that he was a good player who is overrated. He'll always be my favorite baseball player, but I just don't see how anyone can call him "great" with a straight face.

1) You don't get in the HOF for being good.

2) I don't know how anyone could call him "overated" with a straight face with the things he did for baseball and how he transcended the position of SS

3) Streak or no streak, Ripken has more knowledge of the game of baseball than all of us combined. One of the most cerebrial players of all time. And his stats back up him being great.

[pjfootballer]

Forehead, all good points. I conceded that it probably impacted the O's a little. However, taking away the two years that they lost in the ALCS, I doubt a slightly better SS would have pushed them over the top during the last few years of his streak.

I do have to admit that I don't know much about their farm system from that time period. I know that Ryan Miner was the guy who replaced him at 3B when he finally sat out, so it's not like he was blocking any stars in the early 2000s. However, he could have been blocking some better players in the late 1990s.

Minor was a 3rd base prospect. The O's never really drafted many SS for obvious reasons. They spent umpteen years trying to replace Doug DeCinces at 3B with little to no success. And Minor was a project from the get-go since he played more football than baseball at Oklahoma. Ripken's defense and knowledge of hitters was more valuable at SS then his bat was when he started to fade at the plate.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

1) You don't get in the HOF for being good.

2) I don't know how anyone could call him "overated" with a straight face with the things he did for baseball and how he transcended the position of SS

3) Streak or no streak, Ripken has more knowledge of the game of baseball than all of us combined. One of the most cerebrial players of all time. And his stats back up him being great.

1) When it's a subjective vote, sure you can. You can also be voted into the HOF for your accomplishments...you can accomplish things even if you're not GREAT.

2) He's overrated in that he's viewed as a better player than he really was. I said in a couple posts that what he did for the game was fantastic, but as a true player, I believe he is overrated.

3) I agree with the first part and disagree with the second. Here are his career averages:

.276 BA/23 HR/91 RBI/.788 OPS

That's very good...but not great. What puts him over the top is the streak and how he approached the game.

Again, he's my all-time favorite baseball player...I'm not trying to bash the guy.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

1) You don't get in the HOF for being good.

Bill Mazeroski and Phil Rizzuto respectfully disagree.

2) I don't know how anyone could call him "overated" with a straight face with the things he did for baseball and how he transcended the position of SS.

He had six excellent seasons and 38 very good seasons. He is discussed as an all-time great though (at least in Baltimore).

3) Streak or no streak, Ripken has more knowledge of the game of baseball than all of us combined. One of the most cerebrial players of all time.

You have no way of proving that.

And his stats back up him being great.

His stats prove that he had other-wordly durability.

He is 14th all time in hits while sporting a .276 batting average and a .340 on base percentage. He proved that if you play every day for 20 years and are pretty good, you will compile some tremendous numbers.

Ricky Henderson is a similar hitter but got on base at a .400 clip. George Brett was .305 and .369.

[MattFancy]

That's very good...but not great. What puts him over the top is the streak and how he approached the game.

Again, he's my all-time favorite baseball player...I'm not trying to bash the guy.

And he had over 400 HRs and 3,000 hits. So it wasn't just the streak, he put up solid numbers over his career. Yeah his batting average wasn't great, but his numbers were great overall.

[pjfootballer]

1) When it's a subjective vote, sure you can. You can also be voted into the HOF for your accomplishments...you can accomplish things even if you're not GREAT.

2) He's overrated in that he's viewed as a better player than he really was. I said in a couple posts that what he did for the game was fantastic, but as a true player, I believe he is overrated.

3) I agree with the first part and disagree with the second. Here are his career averages:

.276 BA/23 HR/91 RBI/.788 OPS

That's very good...but not great. What puts him over the top is the streak and how he approached the game.

Again, he's my all-time favorite baseball player...I'm not trying to bash the guy.

Again, compare his stats to the shortstops of his time, not the A-Rods of today and his stats were great. Look at Ozzie Smith and Gary Templeton's stats and tell me if his stats are average. You cannot, repeat connot compare him to other players in other positions. For a SS of his time, his stats were great.

[pjfootballer]

Bill Mazeroski and Phil Rizzuto respectfully disagree.

Before my time' date=' but I imagine for their time, their stats were great.[/color']

He had six excellent seasons and 38 very good seasons. He is discussed as an all-time great though (at least in Baltimore).

Have to look at his stats compared to other SS's of his era. Not overall.

You have no way of proving that.

True, but I could venture to guess and probably be close to being right.

His stats prove that he had other-wordly durability.

He is 14th all time in hits while sporting a .276 batting average and a .340 on base percentage. He proved that if you play every day for 20 years and are pretty good, you will compile some tremendous numbers.

Ricky Henderson is a similar hitter but got on base at a .400 clip. George Brett was .305 and .369.

Henderson was a leadoff hitter. He was expected to get on base, hence the higher OBP. Brett was not a power hitter, hence his job was to get hits. Incomparable at the plate. Ripken bury's them both with his glove.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

And he had over 400 HRs and 3,000 hits. So it wasn't just the streak, he put up solid numbers over his career. Yeah his batting average wasn't great, but his numbers were great overall.

He had 12,000 plate appearances. If he didn't have 3,000 hits, there would be a problem.

[Forehead]

And he had over 400 HRs and 3,000 hits. So it wasn't just the streak, he put up solid numbers over his career. Yeah his batting average wasn't great, but his numbers were great overall.

See, the 3,000 hits thing I respect, but it's more of a product of longevity than anything. Ripken was in the league for 21 seasons. Now being brought up late his first year, and a strike, and at the end when he didn't play every day, we'll say just 20 seasons, since we're still crediting him for the hits he got during those periods. That's 160 hits per season, hardly a daunting figure.

200 hit seasons are considered a fine hitting benchmark. Ripken produced two of them in, and came close one other time. 431 homers divided by about 20 season is 21 homers a year. Solid for a SS at the time, but in the grand scheme of things...please. His numbers were nice overall, hardly great, and his career BA (including inexplicably having many of his worst .avg seasons in his prime) drags him down.

[MattFancy]

But Ripken's accomplishments weren't just all hitting. He was one of the best defensive SS in the history or the game. His fielding percentage is better than Ozzie Smith's.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

But Ripken's accomplishments weren't just all hitting. He was one of the best defensive SS in the history or the game. His fielding percentage is better than Ozzie Smith's.

He had no range once he hit 30. He was good defensively before that.

Look, don't get me started on fielding stats. According to fielding stas, Derek Jeter is a great defensive shortstop even though he is kind of awful.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

He had 12' date='000 plate appearances. If he didn't have 3,000 hits, there would be a problem.[/quote']

See, the 3,000 hits thing I respect, but it's more of a product of longevity than anything. Ripken was in the league for 21 seasons. Now being brought up late his first year, and a strike, and at the end when he didn't play every day, we'll say just 20 seasons, since we're still crediting him for the hits he got during those periods. That's 160 hits per season, hardly a daunting figure.

200 hit seasons are considered a fine hitting benchmark. Ripken produced two of them in, and came close one other time. 431 homers divided by about 20 season is 21 homers a year. Solid for a SS at the time, but in the grand scheme of things...please. His numbers were nice overall, hardly great, and his career BA (including inexplicably having many of his worst .avg seasons in his prime) drags him down.

I agree with these points. You have to be careful with the career numbers since he played so long. Again, it's impressive that he could be a very good player for 20+ years, but you have to also qualify his cumulative numbers because of it. That's why I like to look at yearly averages.

And, yes, he revolutionized the SS position to a degree. I have also acknowledged that. I give him credit for the intangible things he did more than the tangible things. And it's those qualities that helped him get into the HOF in my opinion.

Cal Ripken deserves to be in the HOF because it's not the Hall Of Great, but the Hall of Fame. He was a very popular player who was very, very good. He also played for 20 years for one team and brought fantastic work-ethic and dedication to the game. Finally, he impossibly broke a consecutive games streak that no one ever thought would fall and changed the way SS played the game. No argument that he's a HOF...but his overall baseball skills/greatness is overrated.

Again, a .276 BA with 23 HRs and 90ish RBIs is very, very good! He should be proud.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Henderson was a leadoff hitter. He was expected to get on base, hence the higher OBP. Brett was not a power hitter, hence his job was to get hits. Incomparable at the plate. Ripken bury's them both with his glove.

Brett SLG: .487

Ripken SLG: .447

Anyway, Ripken checked every box you need to check to get into the Hall of Fame. He's clearly a Hall of Fame player. And he re-invented the shortstop position. And he holds what is simultaneously the most impressive and pointless record in sports.