HoF or Not? Adrian Beltre

[BishopMVP]

Resurrecting these threads after the Grantland profile today - The Often-Underappreciated Adrian Beltre - The Triangle Blog - Grantland

Career .282/.334/.479. 2,401 Hits, 374 HR's, 2 top 3 MVP finishes, but only 3 All-Star appearances. Possibly the best defensive player of his generation - and the best 3rd baseman since Brooks Robinson - but only 4 Gold Gloves.

So what say you, potential HoF voters?

[DaddyTorgo]

I says no.

Appreciated him here in Boston, very good to great player, but not a HOFer IMO. It's the "Hall of Fame" not the "Hall of Great."

But my standards are probably super-high...there's a lot of people that were voted in pretty easily that I'd question whether they belong. Or at least I would when I was a big baseball fan.

[cartman]

If he has 4 more really productive years like his last few, and manages to get a ring with the Rangers, I think he's in. He should get another top 3 MVP finish this season.

[Suicane75]

I don't think you can say yes or no right now, but seeing as how we've yet to see much, or any regression from him, it's not improbable to forecast an average of around 23 HR, 160 hits for the next 3 seasons or so, which would put him within sniffing distance of 500 HR's and 3000 hits. Obviously if he were to achieve that he'd be a lock HOFer.

The question then becomes, how close is close enough? He'll almost assuredly get 2500 hits and 400 homers, add in his defense and I think you can make a good case that that would be enough, anything he adds on to that, which I personally think will be substantial, and his case gets better and better.

In other words, I think he makes it fairly easily, barring a complete collapse.

[cuervo72]

Ehhhh....

I guess this really has to do with what you expect from a 3B. Being from Philly, I was spoiled. Mike Schmidt was one of the great HR hitters AND was fantastic with the glove. 147 OPS+. Beltre's? 114. That's good, but not great by any stretch. Of course, Brooks Robinson's is a very pedestrian 104 (Santo? 125. Yet it took HIM forever to get in.)

Beltre's career path...is interesting. Up until age 30, outside of a WTF 2004, I don't think we have this conversation. From 31-now, he's been gold.

[lungs]

STEROIDS

[kcchief19]

I'm pretty intrigued by the career progression as well. If he has another solid 3-4 seasons and gets closer 3,000 hits and 500 homers, I think he merits inclusion.

He almost has to have 3-4 more solid years to answer or allay two questions: (1) Was his 2004 season just a career/contract year or was it medically enhanced; and (2) how old is he really? I'll admit, I feel liberal guilt for casting the age question on every Dominican player. But given the circumstantial evidence regarding the issue and the career arcs of several Dominican players, it bears asking just as much as the steroid question. Just like every player in the last quarter century will face the steroid question, so will Dominican players.

From a cursory glance, his career arc sure likes like he's 3 years older than is stated. But if he can play solidly for 2-3 more years, he'll put that question to rest.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

He almost has to have 3-4 more solid years to answer or allay two questions: (1) Was his 2004 season just a career/contract year or was it medically enhanced; and (2) how old is he really? I'll admit, I feel liberal guilt for casting the age question on every Dominican player. But given the circumstantial evidence regarding the issue and the career arcs of several Dominican players, it bears asking just as much as the steroid question. Just like every player in the last quarter century will face the steroid question, so will Dominican players.

From a cursory glance, his career arc sure likes like he's 3 years older than is stated. But if he can play solidly for 2-3 more years, he'll put that question to rest.

After that whole controversy where Boras proved he was 15 when signed, I'm about as certain he's not older than stated as I can be about any Dominican player. If there was any doubt, the MLB wouldn't have punished the Dodgers like that.

Does he get any credit for stadium effects? Just how much playing 10 years in Dodger Stadium/Safeco affected his career numbers is debateable, but it's clearly not a coincidence that 4 of his 5 best seasons have been the 4 spent in Fenway/Arlington even though they occurred after age 30.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

I says no.

Appreciated him here in Boston, very good to great player, but not a HOFer IMO. It's the "Hall of Fame" not the "Hall of Great."

Not sure I get your argument here. Are you implying no because you think he was merely very good, and the HoF should be closer to football's where it's only for the truly elite (an argument I sympathize with, but think you can't really start changing standards after 60 years), or are you saying he shouldn't be in even though he was great, simply because he didn't get as much recognition as he possibly should have during his career? That if he had gotten a few more of the All-Star game appearances or Gold Gloves he probably deserved he'd have a better shot?

[dawgfan]

Beltre is one of my favorite players, and I think he's been underappreciated by the public at large. But...

...he just feels like one of those guys that's close, but not quite good enough. Another 3+ years of strong offensive play might put him over that edge though, and the continuing evolution of the voting populace will help him as his defense and the way his home parks often worked against him will be given more consideration.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

...he just feels like one of those guys that's close, but not quite good enough. Another 3+ years of strong offensive play might put him over that edge though, and the continuing evolution of the voting populace will help him as his defense and the way his home parks often worked against him will be given more consideration.

+1

Though I think 2 more years like his past 2 would be good enough to eventually get him in. That would put him somewhere in the neighborhood of 2800 hits and 435 homers with a couple of decline years to pad those numbers close to the 3000/500 range. He's a guy that will very likely reach 3,000 hits which is pretty much guaranteed to get him in the HoF.

[Izulde]

Nope, not Hall of Fame worthy.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

I says no.

Appreciated him here in Boston, very good to great player, but not a HOFer IMO. It's the "Hall of Fame" not the "Hall of Great."

But my standards are probably super-high...there's a lot of people that were voted in pretty easily that I'd question whether they belong. Or at least I would when I was a big baseball fan.

Lets put it this way - Adrian Beltre is far more of a HOF than anyone who played on those Boston WS teams - including Schilling, Big Papi, and so forth. He's an elite player who has never been recognized as that. No, he's not inner ballot HOF and if people are small-hall guys I accept that arguement, but the man is criminally underrated.

FWIW though, I don't think he actually gets in because of the media.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Not sure I get your argument here. Are you implying no because you think he was merely very good, and the HoF should be closer to football's where it's only for the truly elite (an argument I sympathize with, but think you can't really start changing standards after 60 years), or are you saying he shouldn't be in even though he was great, simply because he didn't get as much recognition as he possibly should have during his career? That if he had gotten a few more of the All-Star game appearances or Gold Gloves he probably deserved he'd have a better shot?

The first one.

[Desnudo]

not hot

[Danny]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Lets put it this way - Adrian Beltre is far more of a HOF than anyone who played on those Boston WS teams - including Schilling, Big Papi, and so forth. He's an elite player who has never been recognized as that. No, he's not inner ballot HOF and if people are small-hall guys I accept that arguement, but the man is criminally underrated.

FWIW though, I don't think he actually gets in because of the media.

Uh no, look at Schilling again. He should be a hall of famer and is easily above beltre right now.

In general I think beltre is not a current hall of fame but 4 more good seasons makes him. Maybe even 3

[Draft Dodger]

it's a no for me, and a fairly easy no at that

[chinaski]

As a disgruntled Mariners fan, I have to vote NO

[SackAttack]

I said nope, but I'll admit to being biased and just a little bitter that he waited to be any good for LA until his walk year.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Lets put it this way - Adrian Beltre is far more of a HOF than anyone who played on those Boston WS teams - including Schilling, Big Papi, and so forth.

Really? Pedro and Manny Ramirez were also on those teams (and I *could* see Pedroia or Lester making a case, but they are nowhere near it right now). Ortiz and Schilling are interesting cases - .286/.381/.548 with 427 HR's, and 216 wins + 3116 K's, both with big postseason heroics and an argument that they had a great peak instead of a long period of above-average but not elite performance. If Ortiz can get to 500 HR's and add a 3rd WS title, he might have a shot, although I do agree with you that's a case where the media perception of him vs. Beltre is wrong.

I guess a bigger question is why (or whether) the media has underrated him. In terms of gold gloves, he wasn't losing to bad fielders - it's mostly Scott Rolen and Evan Longoria, and the only real season he was robbed of an AS appearance was that 2004 one with the Dodgers, and Rolen/Mike Lowell had pretty solid stats too at the break.

[korme]

If he wasn't on the juice, he's getting damn close.

[MrBug708]

No. But I'd certainly put him in before ever considering Pedroia or Lester.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Really? Pedro and Manny Ramirez were also on those teams (and I *could* see Pedroia or Lester making a case, but they are nowhere near it right now). Ortiz and Schilling are interesting cases - .286/.381/.548 with 427 HR's, and 216 wins + 3116 K's, both with big postseason heroics and an argument that they had a great peak instead of a long period of above-average but not elite performance. If Ortiz can get to 500 HR's and add a 3rd WS title, he might have a shot, although I do agree with you that's a case where the media perception of him vs. Beltre is wrong.

I guess a bigger question is why (or whether) the media has underrated him. In terms of gold gloves, he wasn't losing to bad fielders - it's mostly Scott Rolen and Evan Longoria, and the only real season he was robbed of an AS appearance was that 2004 one with the Dodgers, and Rolen/Mike Lowell had pretty solid stats too at the break.

I completely blanked on Pedro and Manny - Mea Culpa. Pedro is perhaps the greatest peak value pitcher of all time, so yeah.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

No. But I'd certainly put him in before ever considering Pedroia or Lester.

Both Pedroia and Lester are 29 right now. Through his age 29 season (7 full seasons in Pedroia's case, 10 in Beltre's), Pedroia has 4 All-Star appearances, 2 Gold Glove's, and an MVP; Beltre had 2 Gold Glove's. Through their age 29 seasons Lester has 98 wins, 1214 K's and 2 AS apps, Schilling had 36 wins, 800 K's, and no AS appearances. That's obviously not a perfect comparison, because most players don't start putting up MVP/Cy Young-level numbers after the age of 30, and I agree both Pedroia and Lester are years away from that conversation, but both have a respectable base if they can maintain (in Pedroia's case) or increase (in Lester's case) their production over the next 6-7 seasons.

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

I completely blanked on Pedro and Manny - Mea Culpa. Pedro is perhaps the greatest peak value pitcher of all time, so yeah.

I know some people are anti-Manny after the PED suspension, but I know how much you loved Pedro, so I figured you just blanked there. Especially as 2004 was Pedro's first post-peak year and he wasn't a huge part of it.

Edit - Just because I was pulling up numbers, Curt Schilling's postseason #'s - 19GS, 11-2 2.23 ERA, 133 IP, 120-25 K/BB, 3 WS's. While the bloody sock game is overrated, his overall numbers and especially 2001 postseason - 6 GS 4-0 1.12 ERA, 48.1 IP 56/6 K/BB - are underrated.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

If Ortiz can get to 500 HR's and add a 3rd WS title, he might have a shot, although I do agree with you that's a case where the media perception of him vs. Beltre is wrong.

Even with Ortiz being a media darling he will most likely never get in since he's basically a steroid case study...

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by chinaski

As a disgruntled Mariners fan, I have to vote NO

?

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

Even with Ortiz being a media darling he will most likely never get in since he's basically a steroid case study...

I always thought he was a case study in not trying to turn your power hitting prospect into a singles hitter. If you're looking for a reason why he took off as a power hitter after getting to Boston this probably has a lot to do with it.

Tom Powers: After all these years, David Ortiz still tormenting Twins - TwinCities.com

Ortiz loved Minnesota when he was here. And he was the most popular guy in the clubhouse. The fans loved him, too, but Ortiz didn't like what the Twins tried to do to him as a hitter. Or at least what he thought the Twins were trying to do to him as a hitter.

Years ago, I talked with him in the Red Sox dugout about the subject. He was on his way to winning a World Series with Boston at the time, but a dark cloud came over him as soon as the topic arose.

"I always hit a lot of home runs when I was coming up," he said. "I'd take a big swing and my first manager would be screaming at me: 'Hey, hey, hey, what are you doing?' Are you kidding me? You want me to swing like a little girl? I'll swing like a little girl."

Ortiz's first manager was Tom Kelly, who has always explained that the Twins were trying to develop Ortiz into a solid major league hitter first. The implication was that Ortiz would be able to swing a bit more freely after he got the basics down. But Ortiz, a big guy, felt restricted.

"My first exhibition game here (with Boston), I came up with a runner on second and no outs," Ortiz said during that same interview. "I'm thinking, 'I've got to get the runner over.' "

Ortiz took a make-contact swing. When he returned to the Red Sox dugout, then-manager Grady Little was waiting for him.

"Grady said, 'This is not the Twins. You've got to bring that guy in,' '' Ortiz said. "OK, looks like I got a green light."

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by mckerney

I always thought he was a case study in not trying to turn your power hitting prospect into a singles hitter. If you're looking for a reason why he took off as a power hitter after getting to Boston this probably has a lot to do with it.

Tom Powers: After all these years, David Ortiz still tormenting Twins - TwinCities.com

I'm sure the PEDs helped...

David Ortiz is still flummoxed by his positive drug test from 2003 | The Strike Zone - SI.com

[chinaski]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

?

He was horrible for the money we spent on him. His nickname around my place was Betray.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by chinaski

He was horrible for the money we spent on him. His nickname around my place was Betray.

Oh man. No, he wasn't. If anything, his production exceeded what we paid him. Please join the 21st century of player evaluation...

[chinaski]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Oh man. No, he wasn't. If anything, his production exceeded what we paid him. Please join the 21st century of player evaluation...

I have no idea how you can come to that conclusion. He was the poster child of bad FA signings all his years in Seattle. 5 seasons with us he averaged .266, 21 HR's and 79 RBI. That's pretty shitty for someone making 64 million over 5. He was a great fielder, i'll give him that. But from hitting 48 homers, then signing with us and hitting 19 the first year began my dislike for him. Then to top that off, leaves to the Red Sox and is magically great again.... then to make it worse he plays for the Rangers. Betray can suck it.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by chinaski

I have no idea how you can come to that conclusion. He was the poster child of bad FA signings all his years in Seattle. 5 seasons with us he averaged .266, 21 HR's and 79 RBI. That's pretty shitty for someone making 64 million over 5. He was a great fielder, i'll give him that. But from hitting 48 homers, then signing with us and hitting 19 the first year began my dislike for him. Then to top that off, leaves to the Red Sox and is magically great again.... then to make it worse he plays for the Rangers. Betray can suck it.

Start using modern statistics.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

I'm sure the PEDs helped...

David Ortiz is still flummoxed by his positive drug test from 2003 | The Strike Zone - SI.com

I'm not certain anyone knows what to make of Ortiz and PED's. I'm pretty certain he at least took some in the early-mid 2000's because he's Dominican, seemingly every power hitter was, and his responses were a little off, but on the flip side he always had power VIDEO: Minor-league David Ortiz impresses A-Rod, Junior in 1996 - CBSSports.com ; and there's a plausible reason it didn't show up until Boston (Twins wanted him to be a singles hitter and platooned him). Then he completely collapsed in 2008-1st half of 2009 to the point he looked like the prototypical steroid case and someone I wanted outright released, only to recover and be a top 5 hitter in baseball again since, with no sign of slowing down. Allegedly the turnaround occurred when he asked for help with "dry eyes that made him blink a lot at the plate" and started using eye-drops before his at-bats... which, admittedly, sounds implausible, but so does that he found a new undetectable PED that was better than what other players were using an getting caught for, and somehow helped him make contact. Because his K rate went from 15% for 2 consecutive years, to 21% and 23% when he slumped, back down to 14% or less the past 3 seasons - I don't see what PED does that.

[HeavyReign]

Originally Posted by chinaski

I have no idea how you can come to that conclusion. He was the poster child of bad FA signings all his years in Seattle. 5 seasons with us he averaged .266, 21 HR's and 79 RBI. That's pretty shitty for someone making 64 million over 5. He was a great fielder, i'll give him that. But from hitting 48 homers, then signing with us and hitting 19 the first year began my dislike for him. Then to top that off, leaves to the Red Sox and is magically great again.... then to make it worse he plays for the Rangers. Betray can suck it.

Richie Sexson was a bad contract. Carlos Silva was a bad contract. If they would have expected Beltre to hit 48 homers again they would've paid him more. Safeco was just a bad match for Beltre offensively.

[chinaski]

Originally Posted by HeavyReign

Richie Sexson was a bad contract. Carlos Silva was a bad contract. If they would have expected Beltre to hit 48 homers again they would've paid him more. Safeco was just a bad match for Beltre offensively.

Haha, yeah those were for sure bad. M's are pretty good at that. But, to put things into perspective in regards to Beltres contract, he was paid more than Pujols. They really did expect him to put up 40 HR's a year for us. Almost everyone expected him too, even with our cavernous outfield.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by chinaski

I have no idea how you can come to that conclusion.

Because I understand park effects, the importance of fielding and the actual market value of wins above replacement.

He was the poster child of bad FA signings all his years in Seattle.

No, he wasn't. Richie Sexson was a much worse contract.

5 seasons with us he averaged .266, 21 HR's and 79 RBI. That's pretty shitty for someone making 64 million over 5. He was a great fielder, i'll give him that. But from hitting 48 homers, then signing with us and hitting 19 the first year began my dislike for him. Then to top that off, leaves to the Red Sox and is magically great again.... then to make it worse he plays for the Rangers. Betray can suck it.

You are aware that different ballparks have different hitting characteristics, right? And that some ballparks are really tough on certain types of hitters relative to others?

Seriously, and I know I'm coming across as condescending, but do yourself a favor and start becoming familiar with modern statistical analysis - you'll have a much better grasp of the game and how to evaluate players.

[molson]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

You are aware that different ballparks have different hitting characteristics, right? And that some ballparks are really tough on certain types of hitters relative to others?

Seriously, and I know I'm coming across as condescending, but do yourself a favor and start becoming familiar with modern statistical analysis - you'll have a much better grasp of the game and how to evaluate players.

His OPS+ also fell off a cliff when he got to Seattle, and each of his 5 years there were all worse than any he's had in any season since. His season average OPS+ in the Seattle years would put him behind 5 current Mariner regulars.

Edit: And is WAR went from 9.6 to 3.2 his first year in Seattle. He wasn't as bad as Richie Sexon but he got the money for that last season in LA and he never got anywhere close to that. There's a reason he could only get a 1 year contract after that.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by molson

His OPS+ also fell off a cliff when he got to Seattle, and each of his 5 years there were all worse than any he's had in any season since. His season average OPS+ in the Seattle years would put him behind 5 current Mariner regulars.

Edit: And is WAR went from 9.6 to 3.2 his first year in Seattle. He wasn't as bad as Richie Sexon but he got the money for that last season in LA and he never got anywhere close to that. There's a reason he could only get a 1 year contract after that.

The money he got appears to actually have been a bit less than he actually produced for the M's over the course of his deal:

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx...ition=3B#value

FanGraphs doesn't list his final year contract amount, but according to Cot's it was $13.4M. If you think fWAR is a good measure, then he produced $65.7M worth of value over his M's contract, and was paid $64M.

I think part of the problem here is folks don't really get just how much a great season is worth; you mention him getting paid per his final season with the Dodgers, but that's just not true - if it were, he would have been getting paid $25M+ per year.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

I'm not certain anyone knows what to make of Ortiz and PED's. I'm pretty certain he at least took some in the early-mid 2000's because he's Dominican, seemingly every power hitter was, and his responses were a little off, but on the flip side he always had power VIDEO: Minor-league David Ortiz impresses A-Rod, Junior in 1996 - CBSSports.com ; and there's a plausible reason it didn't show up until Boston (Twins wanted him to be a singles hitter and platooned him). Then he completely collapsed in 2008-1st half of 2009 to the point he looked like the prototypical steroid case and someone I wanted outright released, only to recover and be a top 5 hitter in baseball again since, with no sign of slowing down. Allegedly the turnaround occurred when he asked for help with "dry eyes that made him blink a lot at the plate" and started using eye-drops before his at-bats... which, admittedly, sounds implausible, but so does that he found a new undetectable PED that was better than what other players were using an getting caught for, and somehow helped him make contact. Because his K rate went from 15% for 2 consecutive years, to 21% and 23% when he slumped, back down to 14% or less the past 3 seasons - I don't see what PED does that.

When did K rate become the #1 stat is proving someone didn't juice? The year Bonds hit 73 his K rate was the 4th highest in his career (14%)... Doesn't mean he didn't cheat. Look I honestly really like David Ortiz, but that doesn't stop the fact that his name leaked out as a PED user.

[Chief Rum]

I would say Beltre wasn't the poster child for bad free agent deals, but I also wouldn't say that was a massive win for the Mariners either. It was a mixed bag. If he was so good, the M's would have brought him back instead of watching him sign a one year deal to "prove himself" with the Red Sox.

I lean toward the thinking of dawgfan here. That said, although I know he acknowledges it, there is more than a little condescension in the responses to chinaski (not just dawgfan). I think there are better ways to get the message across than to respond that way.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

I would say Beltre wasn't the poster child for bad free agent deals, but I also wouldn't say that was a massive win for the Mariners either. It was a mixed bag. If he was so good, the M's would have brought him back instead of watching him sign a one year deal to "prove himself" with the Red Sox.

I lean toward the thinking of dawgfan here. That said, although I know he acknowledges it, there is more than a little condescension in the responses to chinaski (not just dawgfan). I think there are better ways to get the message across than to respond that way.

Well, you know while dawgfan started it with his 21st Century Stat Analysis comment, I think a "I have no idea how you can come to that conclusion." response doesn't exactly help matters.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Well, you know while dawgfan started it with his 21st Century Stat Analysis comment, I think a "I have no idea how you can come to that conclusion." response doesn't exactly help matters.

C'est tres vrai.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

If he was so good, the M's would have brought him back instead of watching him sign a one year deal to "prove himself" with the Red Sox.

It's not quite that simple. The new management thought the team needed another "on-base" guy for the lineup and targeted Chone Figgins, and with the breakout year that Jose Lopez had the year before meant that there was no longer room for Beltre, both in terms of position as well as budget. While I suspect the numbers guys in the new regime (Tom Tango, Tony Blengino) valued Beltre, they also felt like they'd get similar value out of Figgins (a severe miscalculation) and felt his bat would help transform an M's lineup that was heavy on low-contact/good-power guys and short on high OBP guys. They also thought slotting Figgins in the #2 spot would team well with Ichiro.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

It's not quite that simple. The new management thought the team needed another "on-base" guy for the lineup and targeted Chone Figgins, and with the breakout year that Jose Lopez had the year before meant that there was no longer room for Beltre, both in terms of position as well as budget. While I suspect the numbers guys in the new regime (Tom Tango, Tony Blengino) valued Beltre, they also felt like they'd get similar value out of Figgins (a severe miscalculation) and felt his bat would help transform an M's lineup that was heavy on low-contact/good-power guys and short on high OBP guys. They also thought slotting Figgins in the #2 spot would team well with Ichiro.

Also, true, there was more to not bringing back Beltre than simple numbers. But I do clearly remember how little regarded Beltre was coming off of that Mariners contract. Having to sign a one year deal late in the offseason (IIRC) isn't exactly a resounding endorsement of Beltre from the league in general either.

I'm still mystified at what happened to Figgins when he went to the Mariners. I was rooting for him to succeed, as he always seemed to be a hard working and conscientious player while he was with the Angels.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

I'm sure the PEDs helped...

David Ortiz is still flummoxed by his positive drug test from 2003 | The Strike Zone - SI.com

The Dirt | The Players' Tribune

Like I said I wouldn't be shocked if he did in that early 2000's period, but I can see how it's infuriating to him. Especially because someone leaked his initial failed test but no one will say what he tested positive for or if he passed the follow up test a week later.

As for the initial topic, Beltre continued his weird career arc, with his counting stats the lowest since 2009 but his highest OPS+ in that span. I still think he easily deserves it considering his defensive prowess and the lack of 3rd basemen in the HoF, and I think the growing acceptance of nontraditional stats will help him immensely. Worst case he's the next Tim Raines.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by chinaski

Haha, yeah those were for sure bad. M's are pretty good at that. But, to put things into perspective in regards to Beltres contract, he was paid more than Pujols. They really did expect him to put up 40 HR's a year for us. Almost everyone expected him too, even with our cavernous outfield.

excepting Dodger fans who saw one good power year from him before he left for the one ballpark deadlier to HR than the Ravine.

Anybody who thought Beltre's walk year meant he had it figured out and was going to hit 40 HR a year forever after was engaged in self-deception, and there was exactly one fanbase at the time he signed that contract with any incentive to delude themselves that way.

[tarcone]

LOL. 1st time I saw this I thought it said "Adrian Beltre: Hot or not"

[ColtCrazy]

Originally Posted by tarcone

LOL. 1st time I saw this I thought it said "Adrian Beltre: Hot or not"

Agreed. And it's confusing for non-baseball fans like me that see the name "Adrian" and think, okay, it's a trendy girl's name.

[Autumn]

Hot

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by Autumn

Hot

Funny. I read this as hot or not just now and was thinking wtf.