Comments on: Victorino Wins Final Vote!

By: Jaggers

Jaggers — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 01:50:34 +0000

@Joe From NJ – A *substantial* amount of Victorino’s votes came from Hawaii, which would suffer even more from your nonexistent West coast bias than California – 4pm EST is 10am Hawaii. Nevertheless, your objection makes no sense, as the West Coast doesn’t have fewer hours, it has the same amount of time. If anything, having the contest end at roughly the end of the work day means the West Coast had a slightly higher proportion of off-work hours to vote, meaning if there is a bias it’s in favor of the West Coast!

By: CZ

CZ — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 01:37:40 +0000

David, I’ve been doing a lot of disagreeing today but I have to respond to your comments. Ryan Howard absolutely DOES deserve to be an All-Star. You can call it ‘unfair’ all you want but I personally believe that I a guy who has a spectacular second half of the previous season (2nd in MVP voting remember) should have that count in his favor when there are close comparisons between players. Also, and this has been done by every manager since I can remember, Manuel is going to take some liberties to get some of his guys from the WFC team in the game. Remember Torre taking like 8 Yankees back in the late 90′s? Its the right that you earn…and the truth is that he ONLY took Howard. You could make the case that Feliz, Werth or Victorino could have been selected with out a huge argument. Yeah, ‘this game counts’, which is bull, but its still an exhibition.I’d love to see every ‘deserving’ player make it but you have to draw the line somewhere and when it comes down to it the to the victors go the spoils.

By: David

David — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 01:25:32 +0000

@gregger: people care that he took 4 1b because he only took 2 3b. Im not saying that it is going to be such a problem logistically, but if you are taking 4 at one position they better be more deserving than anyone at all underchosen positions. that wasn’t the case this year. only 2 3b went and there were guys not chosen who deserved it more than howard. does anyone really think that howard would have been on the team if not for manuel? compare his numbers to sandoval. Howard has more HR and RBI. but he should. he plays at CBP and hits in the best lineup in the league. Sandoval has been an obvious all star and its too bad that he doesnt get to make it there bc he has better numbers than Howard in some respects, and better than Vic across the board.

By: Joe from NJ

Joe from NJ — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:43:43 +0000

SF kong-fu panda should win.
Final vote is not fair for west caost – special in tight race at final day – west coast vote until 1pm east coast vote until 4pm – of course east coast will get more vote in.
not many people vote at first day – west coast voters got 3 more USELESS hours at first day. Most people vote at final day when race is heat up – east Coast voters got more USEFUL hours. Nowonder east always win. You can check history in final vote.

By: Gregger

Gregger — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:33:07 +0000

There’s 34 players on the all-star team, I dont see why people care if he took 4 first baseman. I think he can fill the rest of the line up from the other 30 players he has.

By: David

David — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:03:47 +0000

Victorino making the all star team is yet another example of why fan voting should be eliminated. I am NOT sayin that Victorino is a bad player. To the contrary, I think he is a good player. However, because Manuel decided to bring Howard [undeservedly, sorry guys, you shouldn't bring 4 1b and he was the worst], Sandoval and Reynolds got left off the team and both deserved to be there arguably over Howard, but certainly over Victorino. Beltran shouldnt be on the team and Rollins almost made the team [which would have also been a joke]; all because of fan voting. Fan voting is a joke. Too many blogs advertise voting for “their guys” and fans from EVERY team go out and vote guys who have no business being there. I get why people do it, but it makes a mockery out of being an all star, and is damaging to a roster that should have the BEST at each position. Especially since the game “counts” and could be the difference between the Phils having home field advantage or not. Sorry Im not being a homer and hurraying Vic making the team. Just trying to call it like I see it.

By: Brian of CO

Brian of CO — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 22:09:17 +0000

thats my exact fear CZ, he has burned the Mets “countless times” and we as Phillies Phans laughed about it because they choked, and things like that, now we sign him and expect different? Why expect different?

By: CZ

CZ — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 22:03:57 +0000

I bet if the Mets hadn’t been burned countless times by Pedro in the past they would have loved to take a shot at him…but at this point Minaya would be lynched for it. Give Amaro credit for having some balls!

By: Brian of CO

Brian of CO — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:59:47 +0000

You are correct that everyone ripped Amaro for signing Ibanez, but Ibanez at least wasnt known as being greedy, joking, and had numbers. Pedro’s numbers have been declining in the last few years, so much so that the Mets are laughing that we signed one of there has beens. As I say ALL THE TIME, I love crow, and, and will gladly eat crow if he actually works. However the current #’s are against him. Pedro of 5 years ago would have been nice, Pedro of current is in decline, didnt WOW anyone in the WBC, and wasnt re-signed because he choked at the end. I hope I am wrong.

By: Nationals#1

Nationals#1 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:59:09 +0000

not everyone ripped amaro for signing ibanez, i didnt…

By: CZ

CZ — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:58:21 +0000

I love Happ…I think he’s solid and I’d rather the Phils could get Halladay without giving him up. But hear me out. This would be perfect scenario and maybe the Phils are thinking this way. Get Pedro and let him audition for the next few weeks > If he pitches well you can trade for Halladay w/o giving up Drabek by including Happ > Next season Drabek takes Pedro’s spot in the rotation and he’s the future of the staff along with Hamels.

Who knows but there is nothing bad that can come from taking a low-risk flyer on a guy who has won Cy Young awards.

By: Ed R.

Ed R. — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:53:20 +0000

You don’t know what the prospect will give you, that is part of what makes them a prospect and not a major leaguer. It’s a risk like everything else, but again, I will chance a guy with a track record of success over someone with no track record at all. If it doesn’t work it doesn’t work and we are just where we are at now. If the Phillies signed Pedro and are now not going to pursue Halladay, which no one has said was the case then why is this bad?

By: Ed R.

Ed R. — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:51:17 +0000

And you base that on what? The fact that the 5th spot which has been a game of musical chairs for the last month is suddenly now finalized because they have Pedro. Very doubtful. Everyone ripped Amaro for signing Ibanez and now it looks like the best deal of the off season. Might not hurt to give him some benefit of the doubt until he shows that he doesn’t deserve it. So far he has not done that.

By: Brian of CO

Brian of CO — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:50:13 +0000

so you you would rather pay Pedro 2-40 Mil to get the same results as a prospect paying them 400K?

By: CZ

CZ — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:49:56 +0000

Pedro can only make us better. The Phillies are not relying on him…they are not stupid enough to let him continuously go out there and get lit up. He will not make us worse.

By: Ed R.

Ed R. — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:49:10 +0000

Brian why does signing Pedro mean we lose the division? I will take the track record of Pedro over the track record of Rodrigo Lopez. Clearly the Phillies do not want to rush anyone up from the farm and I am fine with that. With or without Pedro the Phillies are still the best team in the division. Best team in the NL? With or without Pedro the answer is no. If the Phillies don’t trade for Halladay the Cardinals will, that I am almost sure of.

By: Brian of CO

Brian of CO — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:48:01 +0000

Sorry Ed R, I think exactly the Opposite. I think they signed Pedro AS the starting Pitcher. It was one or the other.

By: DJ

DJ — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:47:46 +0000

Pedro isn’t a bad ideal considering we have a 82 mph 46 yr old pitcher. Yea give him a chance. It’s better than bringing a young guy up and him getting crushed or the scene be too big for him. Think about it they might not be bringing up one of their prospects because they want to trade them for Halladay. You never know!

By: CZ

CZ — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:47:36 +0000

The Pedro signing and the Halladay trade are completely separate issues. 2mil with no commitment means nothing. It’s such a low risk move. This does not mean we are out of money. If they want Halladay they will get him with or without Pedro.

All it might do, in my mind, is make it slightly more likely that they can include Happ in a deal for Doc as they have more depth of veteran pitchers…but that would probably depend on how Pedro perfoms in his first appearances.

By: Ed R.

Ed R. — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:45:58 +0000

Anyone thing that maybe they signed Pedro because they know they have to lose Happ if they trade Halladay? This move could very much be a precursor to a trade with Toronto.