Roberto Alomar Retires

[mjb2124]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

I humbly disagree, but I totally respect Mazeroski and can see a great debate over this.

It's a tough call. The reason I go with Mazeroski is that he never had the benefit of playing on turf. Even the grass fields were better manicured during Alomar's day.

I also choose Maz because he changed the way the double play was turned. Not as flashy as Alomar or others, but he had the nickname "No Hands" because he was one of the first players to turn a double play without actually catch the ball. He'd just transfer it from his catching hand to his throwing hand by having the ball bounce of the heel of his glove.

From a stat standpoint, these guys are virutally dead-even.

Maz Fielding % and the league fielding % during his career:

.983 and .976

Alomar Fielding % and the league fielding % during his career:

.984 and .981

IMO you can't go wrong by stating either guy was the better fielder (add Morgan to that list as well). It becomes even more difficult when the players were from different generations.

[VanCitySportsGuy]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

It's a tough call. The reason I go with Mazeroski is that he never had the benefit of playing on turf. Even the grass fields were better manicured during Alomar's day.

Actually most people view playing on turf a lot harder than playing on grass from a defensive standpoint. The Jays broadcasters and fielders always mention this. The ball is bouncier on turf.

[VanCitySportsGuy]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

It's a tough call. The reason I go with Mazeroski is that he never had the benefit of playing on turf. Even the grass fields were better manicured during Alomar's day.

Actually most people view playing on turf a lot harder than playing on grass from a defensive standpoint. The Jays broadcasters and fielders always mention this. The ball is bouncier on turf.

[SportsTop]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

Actually most people view playing on turf a lot harder than playing on grass from a defensive standpoint. The Jays broadcasters and fielders always mention this. The ball is bouncier on turf.

I don't know how it can be more difficult. The ball may travel a bit faster and the ball may be "bouncier", but the hops are most always more true.

[SportsTop]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

Actually most people view playing on turf a lot harder than playing on grass from a defensive standpoint. The Jays broadcasters and fielders always mention this. The ball is bouncier on turf.

I don't know how it can be more difficult. The ball may travel a bit faster and the ball may be "bouncier", but the hops are most always more true.

[mjb2124]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

I don't know how it can be more difficult. The ball may travel a bit faster and the ball may be "bouncier", but the hops are most always more true.

Exactly. I'll take turf anyday over natural surfaces. I think any fielder will tell you that it doesn't matter how fast the ball is coming. The biggest issue is that bad hop that can happen from a rock or poor field conditions on a natural surface.

AF - I think the Jays announcers are blowing smoke.

[mjb2124]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

I don't know how it can be more difficult. The ball may travel a bit faster and the ball may be "bouncier", but the hops are most always more true.

Exactly. I'll take turf anyday over natural surfaces. I think any fielder will tell you that it doesn't matter how fast the ball is coming. The biggest issue is that bad hop that can happen from a rock or poor field conditions on a natural surface.

AF - I think the Jays announcers are blowing smoke.

[RahKhem]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

What did Hirschbeck do?

Reportedly Hirschbeck made some disparaging remark about Alomar's mother.

[RahKhem]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

What did Hirschbeck do?

Reportedly Hirschbeck made some disparaging remark about Alomar's mother.

[SPTO]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

Exactly. I'll take turf anyday over natural surfaces. I think any fielder will tell you that it doesn't matter how fast the ball is coming. The biggest issue is that bad hop that can happen from a rock or poor field conditions on a natural surface.

AF - I think the Jays announcers are blowing smoke.

I've always heard from broadcasters (not just Jays broadcasters) that turf is a lot harder to field on because most turf (this in the 80s) weren't perfectly laid down. There would be seams and such that would give the ball an unatural hop. In fact most broadcasters said that teams average a run or two more on turf due to those kind of hops and such.

I'm not saying AF is right but it's something i've heard.

EDIT: I found a study of Artificial Turf and Grass that covers the years 1984 to 1994. Apparently there isn't that much difference between the two surfaces but doubles and triples are more prevalent on turf.

Take a look if you want:

http://www.bostonbaseball.com/whitesox/baseball_extras/turf.html

[SPTO]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

Exactly. I'll take turf anyday over natural surfaces. I think any fielder will tell you that it doesn't matter how fast the ball is coming. The biggest issue is that bad hop that can happen from a rock or poor field conditions on a natural surface.

AF - I think the Jays announcers are blowing smoke.

I've always heard from broadcasters (not just Jays broadcasters) that turf is a lot harder to field on because most turf (this in the 80s) weren't perfectly laid down. There would be seams and such that would give the ball an unatural hop. In fact most broadcasters said that teams average a run or two more on turf due to those kind of hops and such.

I'm not saying AF is right but it's something i've heard.

EDIT: I found a study of Artificial Turf and Grass that covers the years 1984 to 1994. Apparently there isn't that much difference between the two surfaces but doubles and triples are more prevalent on turf.

Take a look if you want:

http://www.bostonbaseball.com/whitesox/baseball_extras/turf.html

[SportsTop]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

I've always heard from broadcasters (not just Jays broadcasters) that turf is a lot harder to field on because most turf (this in the 80s) weren't perfectly laid down. There would be seams and such that would give the ball an unatural hop. In fact most broadcasters said that teams average a run or two more on turf due to those kind of hops and such.

I'm not saying AF is right but it's something i've heard.

EDIT: I found a study of Artificial Turf and Grass that covers the years 1984 to 1994. Apparently there isn't that much difference between the two surfaces but doubles and triples are more prevalent on turf.

Take a look if you want:

http://www.bostonbaseball.com/whites...tras/turf.html

I understand what the study is suggesting, but I think the data can be interpreted a couple of different ways.

I, for one, think that the BA is always going to be higher in the AL than it is in the NL due to the designated hitter. The study would probably hold a little more water in my opinion if they eliminated the pitcher's batting totals from the NL side of the study.

Now, on to the artificial turf issue:

The simple fact is that infielders (SS, 2B, 3B more specifically) can play much deeper on artificial turf than they ever could have on natural grass. This provides multiple benefits, the most prevelant being that drastically increases your range and gives you that added fraction of a second to react to the ball off of the bat (which also indirectly effects range). That, combined with truer hops on artificial turf, lead me to believe that fielder's would benefit more from turf than grass.

[SportsTop]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

I've always heard from broadcasters (not just Jays broadcasters) that turf is a lot harder to field on because most turf (this in the 80s) weren't perfectly laid down. There would be seams and such that would give the ball an unatural hop. In fact most broadcasters said that teams average a run or two more on turf due to those kind of hops and such.

I'm not saying AF is right but it's something i've heard.

EDIT: I found a study of Artificial Turf and Grass that covers the years 1984 to 1994. Apparently there isn't that much difference between the two surfaces but doubles and triples are more prevalent on turf.

Take a look if you want:

http://www.bostonbaseball.com/whites...tras/turf.html

I understand what the study is suggesting, but I think the data can be interpreted a couple of different ways.

I, for one, think that the BA is always going to be higher in the AL than it is in the NL due to the designated hitter. The study would probably hold a little more water in my opinion if they eliminated the pitcher's batting totals from the NL side of the study.

Now, on to the artificial turf issue:

The simple fact is that infielders (SS, 2B, 3B more specifically) can play much deeper on artificial turf than they ever could have on natural grass. This provides multiple benefits, the most prevelant being that drastically increases your range and gives you that added fraction of a second to react to the ball off of the bat (which also indirectly effects range). That, combined with truer hops on artificial turf, lead me to believe that fielder's would benefit more from turf than grass.

[jLp_vAkEr0]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

Roberto Alomar will be a 1st ballot HOF.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.

[jLp_vAkEr0]

Re: Roberto Alomar Retires

Roberto Alomar will be a 1st ballot HOF.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.