Pujols, Mr. September

[Peter_Spaeth]

So we're now explaining the second half of Pujols' career by saying he's "human." LOL why can't people just accept what the numbers show, that he had an unreal first half, a mostly average second half, and that his RBI totals benefited greatly from hitting behind Trout? These are just facts, there's no emotion in them. Why would anyone take offense?

BTW how many all star teams did Pujols make in the last 12 years? 2, including this year which was honorary as he had a bad first half. Just showing he was human I guess.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So we're now explaining the second half of Pujols' career by saying he's "human." LOL why can't people just accept what the numbers show, that he had an unreal first half, a mostly average second half, and that his RBI totals benefited greatly from hitting behind Trout? These are just facts, there's no emotion in them. Why would anyone take offense?

Because there are a lot of dipshits here who get triggered and go nuts by anything that does not accord with a narrative they made up.

We got through like ten posts with reasonable discourse, so that’s pretty good.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

Because there are a lot of dipshits here who get triggered and go nuts by anything that does not accord with a narrative they made up.

We got through like ten posts with reasonable discourse, so that’s pretty good.

I don't see why pointing out facts gets translated into hating or bashing someone. I have said all along I like Pujols and he's an all time great player. That doesn't mean one should not critically examine numbers.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I don't see why pointing out facts gets translated into hating or bashing someone. I have said all along I like Pujols and he's an all time great player. That doesn't mean one should not critically examine numbers.

I forget who, but someone with a lot more brain cells than me observed something along the lines of “expecting people to be reasonable is the most eminently unreasonable thing”. I wish I knew why any attempt to deal in reality brings this out, pretty much everywhere where man speaks. Many people simply do not live in a state of rationality, and many of us apparently do not live in the state of hyper emotion that many others do.

[ClementeFanOh]

PeterSpaeth- couldn't have scripted your responses better if I wrote them
myself. What's next? Will you examine the need for basketball players to
miss shots, in order for great rebounders to accumulate the rebounds?
(Don't answer that, please...)

1911- nope, the "he doesn't agree so he must be irrational" argument is a
non-starter. Back to the basement for you! Just keep imagining that the "bad
man must be crazy", I know how important it is that you win all arguments in
your own mind.

Trent King (written without any increase in blood pressure and a complete
lack of wild- eyed irrationality)

[G1911]

Well, the fantasy arguments and statements I have never made and are absent from the transcript that ClementeFan imagines happened are certainly nutball.

Thankfully we have this clear headed thinker to completely make things up, get pissed off at statements of actual fact, completely lie, and flip out constantly instead of filling his med prescription. Diogenes has found his rational man, the lamp may be retired.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I thought Diogenes was looking for an honest man, not a rational one lol.

[ClementeFanOh]

PeterSpaeth- I'm not "taking offense". I have directly stated Pujols'
performance declined after he went to the Angels. I have directly
acknowledged the brilliant discovery that he- like every hitter who has ever
stepped to the plate- needed baserunners to hit in. I didn't "explain" the
second half of his career by claiming that he's only human, I replied to
asinine comments by 1911 that deserved the retort. If anything, I "take
offense" at artificially generated nonsense and the people who think it is
clever or insightful.

Short version:

1) Pujols has been a great player by ANY statistical measure

2) Yes, he benefitted by having a great player ahead of him. He also
benefitted by having the skill to drive him in. Trout didn't bat for him.

3) Yes, RBI guys need the reality of baserunners on base, to hit them in.

4) NONE of this has a thing to do with that little achievement of hitting
700 home runs or enjoying a .296 lifetime BA.

Seems like a couple of you have come to the brilliant conclusion that Pujols
declined over time and needed other players to do their jobs(!) in order to
accumulate his RBIs total. Well done, Nobel-level work there...

Finally, I'm sure that 1911 has replied while I'm typing. He fits the label of
"tiresome lunatic" to a T, and I'm sure his response will exude objectivity
and reasonableness- so long as we agree with everything he says.

Trent King

[Peter_Spaeth]

And yes, many of Pujols' Angels years were indeed below average for him-
period. You worship stat lines, look it up. Doesn't mean he isn't a great
player. It means he is human.

Sure sounds like an explanation to me, but maybe I can't keep up with your thought process.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ClementeFanOh

PeterSpaeth- I'm not "taking offense". I have directly stated Pujols'
performance declined after he went to the Angels. I have directly
acknowledged the brilliant discovery that he- like every hitter who has ever
stepped to the plate- needed baserunners to hit in. I didn't "explain" the
second half of his career by claiming that he's only human, I replied to
asinine comments by 1911 that deserved the retort. If anything, I "take
offense" at artificially generated nonsense and the people who think it is
clever or insightful.

Short version:

1) Pujols has been a great player by ANY statistical measure

2) Yes, he benefitted by having a great player ahead of him. He also
benefitted by having the skill to drive him in. Trout didn't bat for him.

3) Yes, RBI guys need the reality of baserunners on base, to hit them in.

4) NONE of this has a thing to do with that little achievement of hitting
700 home runs or enjoying a .296 lifetime BA.

Seems like a couple of you have come to the brilliant conclusion that Pujols
declined over time and needed other players to do their jobs(!) in order to
accumulate his RBIs total. Well done, Nobel-level work there...

Finally, I'm sure that 1911 has replied while I'm typing. He fits the label of
"tiresome lunatic" to a T, and I'm sure his response will exude objectivity
and reasonableness- so long as we agree with everything he says.

Trent King

The point on 2 is that Pujols' other numbers for those years demonstrate that ANY average ML hitter in that situation would have had that many RBIs or close to it. Giving him "credit" for driving them in is rather meaningless.