Comments on: Two Tigers win Gold Gloves, but not the right two

By: Coach Jim

Coach Jim — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 16:58:13 +0000

Next year we’ll have 5 Tigers competing for GGs. I’m adding Guillen at 1B.

By: billfer

billfer — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 10:39:18 +0000

No calling people dumb.

By: David

David — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 06:30:50 +0000

Ba Zing

I really hope Brandon hits well next year not only for the team but to shut guys like Rings and Stephen up for being dumb.

He is as good as it gets at third. And as Billfer pointed out (and I did a few times awhile back) he along with Guillen and Casey mashed in the WS.

However if we were to get ARod (yea right…) for a tad more than Maggs (16-20 mil – again year right…) I don’t know where I would play Rentaria – LF?

I wonder if Arod said he’d come to Detroit for 20mil and them moving in the fences if Dombrowski would do it, I saw his interview with Seth Everett and he seemed pretty against it- only b/c Arod wants so much.

By: billfer

billfer — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 03:13:43 +0000

I don’t have a big problem with the Polanco selection because a case can be made for it. He just wasn’t the most deserving.

As for Inge, I’m pretty sure that a ton of players and coaches weren’t thinking about the bonehead non-force play. His highlight plays got a lot more coverage and I’m entirely confident getting picked off 2nd didn’t factor into their voting. And while we’re on the irrelevant Brandon Inge stats, he was one of only 3 Tigers to actually hit well in the 2006 World Series.

By: Rings

Rings — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 19:02:01 +0000

While there’s long been the Inge debate on various portions of his game, defense included, a few of his memorable brain farts (attempting a force at third in a non-force situation, getting picked off 2nd on a fly ball in a 1-run game, etc.) and his poor performance in last year’s World Series may have had more to do with the outcome of the (subjective) voting than anything.

Granderson and Sizemore will long battle for favor among AL CF’ers. Although both are media friendly (MLB blog & playoff commentary vs. SI cover and female fan base), Grady has the upper hand at the moment.

Polanco deserves the award, stats be darned. No question on this one.

By: Mark in Chicago

Mark in Chicago — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:54:09 +0000

Dear Billfer,

You have banged the hornet’s nest with a stick by posting a supportive/positive case for Inge. Good luck, my friend, you will need it.

Sincerely,

MiC

By: jim-mt

jim-mt — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:33:16 +0000

No stats to back it up; Inge makes spectacular plays, but then seems to botch an easy play in a critical situation.

And I wish he would quit being his own batting coach(per Jim Price)-he needs help!

By: The Spot Starters

The Spot Starters — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 16:36:50 +0000

Agree totally with the Pudge and Granderson comments. Not sure I’m on board with Polanco and Inge. I recognize that Polanco doesn’t have the strongest arm or is the speediest in the field but he was flawless. I think even two errors would have damaged his candidacy, but he was perfect.

Pudge is clearly slipping, nothing else needs to be said there.

I try to separate Inge the batter with Inge the fielder but I feel that my vision may be clouded on that front. If I’m not mistaken I don’t think he led the league in any defensive statistics.

Granderson deserves it for patrolling a huge outfield and making very few mistakes. He always takes great routes to balls, his main problem (and it barely came up) was that sometimes his long throws are way off line. He’s a stud in center.

By: Lee Panas

Lee Panas — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 06:16:53 +0000

There is no way Pudge should have won the award. Polanco’s award was reasonable although probably not fully deserved. You can probably make better cases for Inge and Granderson. Even Granderson is not clear cut though because the metrics don’t say anything about an outfielders arm and his not too good. I still think he deserved it but it’s arguable from that standpoint.

By: Mike R

Mike R — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 06:16:08 +0000

Billfer, you could have summed this up with:

“Gold Glove voting is a joke. Rafael Palmeiro won a Gold Glove at 1st base despite playing in 28 games at 1st base in 1999.”

And I’m not making that up. Peep his fielding numbers over at baseball-reference.com. He won GG in 1997-1999.

By: Joel

Joel — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 05:51:23 +0000

I’m fine with Inge’s approach to the game in the field. His approach at the plate is what’s in question.

By: Jason

Jason — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 05:34:55 +0000

Placido deserves the award. End of story.

By: Walewander

Walewander — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 05:20:43 +0000

Stephen – there is a lot to complain about Brandon’s approach with the stick, sure, but there sure isn’t anything wrong with his glove. It’s even more impressive once you take the position shifts into account.

Oh, and Curtis was ROBBED.

By: Vince in MN

Vince in MN — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 04:22:39 +0000

The Gold Glove Awards have been a joke for years – I am not sure exactly what they are meant to honor, but apparently defensive skill doesn’t have a lot to do with it. Most Popular Player by Position Award might be more accurate, when the trophy could be changed to a bronze smiley face instead of a glove.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 04:18:47 +0000

Brandon Inge winning a Gold Glove would have made him more tradeable (good!) but Inge winning a Gold Glove would have validated his approach to the game. (not good!)