As far as I can tell, people have been down on Pat Burrell since he threw up on the birthday cake at his friend Steven Chalmers' third birthday party. Since then he has been booed mercilessly anytime he plays baseball, goes food shopping, or hides out in the woods to avoid being booed.I've spent a good portion of time defending Burrell for the past 2 or 3 years. Not just because he boldly refuses to shave or wax his chest, but also because he's just not as bad as most Phillies fans think he is. In the early going this season, as painful as it has been for the team, Burrell has done more than anyone expected. He has a 1.061 OPS and has been almost competent in the field. But fans are just waiting for him to return to his "crappy" persona, the overpaid one they believe is part of a vast worldwide conspiracy to further ruin the Phillies with walks and the music of Ronnie James Dio (I am sad he's changed his at-bat music).
So what happens if Burrell reverts to his form from previous seasons (except 2003- yeech)? Well, as much as it may pain people to read this, the Phillies will still have an above-average offensive player on their hands. The horror! I can be persuaded that Burrell is vastly overpaid for his production, but so are quite a few professional athletes- like all of them. For a more team specific example than "all of them", look at Jimmy Rollins, a player I like a great deal. For the $8 million he'll make this season to hit leadoff and play SS, chances are the Phils will get a .330-.340 OBP out of him, a good amount of HR's, good D, and a bunch of SB's. Burrell, although not fearsome on the base paths (unless falling down is fearsome) or with the leather like Rollins, will make up for that with his OBP and power production, and in fact will most likely contribute more runs created than Rollins will this year. Yet if Burrell made $8mil a year, everyone would still cry that he makes too much, whereas Rollins is considered to be a fairly priced talent. Sure, $13 million is a lot to pay for an .890 OPS, but I'll be damned if there aren't a whole bunch of worse contracts out there. I'm sure someone is still paying Albert Belle to this day, and he hasn't been in the league since 2000.
Of course, it's not just about numbers, especially in Philly (or Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Chicago, Milwaukee, Boston, New York, etc.). People love Rollins because he told the world that the Phillies are the team to beat in the NL East, which they are proving to be correct in the opposite way of what Jimmy meant. But fans hate Burrell because he's overpaid (can't stress that enough), lacks "passion" (which is really a bigger problem for marriages than baseball players), and their girlfriends think he has a nice ass. For his sake, hopefully Pat Burrell hits 49 homers this season, vows to fight the entire Mets lineup in a steel cage, and gets cottage cheese ass so bad it's visible through his pants. Then maybe he'll finally get the acceptance that professional athletes so desperately crave according to fans, pundits, and other people who don't even know professional athletes.
3 comments:
Fair points, sir. I'd like to make a counter-argument or two, if you'd be so kind.
First off, let's get one thing out of the way - Pat Burrell is a good baseball player. He's got a number of faults, but his OBP is consistently very good, and he's got some pop. He is by no means as terrible as Phillies fans make him out to be. That being said, he's been woefully inadequate with runners in scoring position for a few years now (mediocre .847 OPS with RISP, downright paltry (relatively speaking) .736 with bases loaded 2004-2006... and this leaves out his 2003 debacle) to the point where it's more than just a coincidence. It's a problem. I'm not the kind of guy who puts a lot of stock into isolated instances of failing in the clutch (i.e. A-Rod going 1-10 or whatever in the playoffs last year), but this is spread out over hundreds of at-bats. Burrell simply does not deliver at the rate he should when there are men on base.
And for all the talk about OBP, a fine statistic indeed, it should be noted that he bats fifth and is followed by Wes Helms (who I like as a role player but come on now) and Aaron Rowand, neither of whom have a history of being big RBI guys. Burrell is paid to drive in runs, and he says as much himself. So for him to be as selective as he is is, to me, very frustrating. He walks a ton and also takes the most called third strikes in baseball - I'd be more forgiving of someone like Jimmy Rollins for putting up those numbers. But how many times can I watch this dude execute the Inverted Pelvic Thrust to avoid a pitch that's RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE, leaving a runner stranded on third when simply putting the ball in play would get the job done? If Burrell had any speed at all and could deliver that OBP from the three-hole, I think I'd like him a lot more. His pitch selection is the problem, in my eyes.
Remember 2002? He struck out a shitload of times, but it seemed to be mostly flailing at curve balls in the dirt. I oddly prefer that to 2007 Pat Burrell, where he stares at two-strike fastballs and tries to work a walk. At least then he was trying to drive in some runs.
Oh, see, I don't care about strikeouts; an out is an out to me. I know that's an unpopular stance, but the research I've seen convinces me of that.
http://www.thediamondangle.com/marasco/opan/kfile.html
Well yeah, an out is an out is an out. I understand that. But when you stare at a 2-2 fastball right down the middle as if you've never seen one before as opposed to actually, like, swinging at it... your odds of reaching base go down drastically.
Post a Comment