Both of these Chicago players are due to come off the DL this weekend for the crosstown series.

 

The question begs to be asked; which type of player do you prefer to have?

 

Option A: The Darin Erstad type. Gives more than 100%, gets his jersey dirty, hustles, but puts up crappy offensive numbers

Option B: The Aramis Ramirez type. Doesn't run out all grounders, some long hits are singles or throw outs at second, but he give you 30 HR, 100+ RBI's and a solid BA and OPS.

 

What is your choice?

I wonder if there is a player who combines both elements of the two above... the ultimate grinder.

Aramis in a f***ing second. Probably less.

Darin Erstad is too Grinder-ey

You're better than this Santo.

I actually think it's an outstanding poll and I'm SHOCKED that Aramis is up 9-0 at this time. I think it's fairly obvious who I'd pick.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 10:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're better than this Santo.

If we can establish that Erstad's grindy abilities don't really add up to much, then perhaps people will quit mentioning it and expect him to turn around this entire team.

 

Both Erstad and Aramis are coming off the DL, they play for Chicago teams, but they are on complete opposite ends of the hustle spectrum.

 

Erstad's play directly affects his health, and my Cardinals fan buddy argues Aramis' poor work ethic contributes to his leg problems.

Maybe if it was someone who was not only grindy, but could at least take a walk, we could talk.

 

How about the Erstad of 2000 versus the current Aramis?

If Erstad was good, then yes, I'd choose him. I think a better question would be...

 

A player who is a grinder, gives 110%, and plays good D with numbers something like .265, 25 HR, and 80 RBI

 

OR

 

A player who doesn't give it his all, plays decent D, but with numbers of .310, 30-40 HR, and 100+ RBI.

I'm not directly arguing Erstad vs. Ramirez. I put "type" after their names in the poll. Aramis is not a unique player, neither is Erstad.

 

Let's bury Erstad's 2000 once and for all. Christ, it was 3 years before Esteban Loaiza's fluke year which was 4 years ago already.

A player who doesn't give it his all, plays decent D, but with numbers of .310, 30-40 HR, and 100+ RBI.

IMO, Aramis does not play decent D.

IMO, Aramis does not play decent D.

lets just say he does for the sake of arguement though.

If we can establish that Erstad's grindy abilities don't really add up to much, then perhaps people will quit mentioning it and expect him to turn around this entire team.

 

Both Erstad and Aramis are coming off the DL, they play for Chicago teams, but they are on complete opposite ends of the hustle spectrum.

 

Erstad's play directly affects his health, and my Cardinals fan buddy argues Aramis' poor work ethic contributes to his leg problems.

 

Who expects Erstad to turn anything around? I'm his biggest fan around here and I don't expect him to turn s*** around just like I didn't expect him to really be a World Championship or Divison Title leadoff man.

 

All I've ever said is that his work ethic and his play is admirable because he makes the best of his abilities. I've never said he was a superstar and nobody this side of Ken the Hawk Harrelson has, either, but he thinks Joe Crede is better than Alex Rodriguez.

 

You think Ramirez in a second.

So, if the question is...would I rather have a guy who puts up slightly worse numbers but actually tries or a guy who puts up better numbers but isn't a grinder, I'll take the guy who's giving it his all.

 

To me, there are a couple great examples of teams built of guys just putting up great numbers, and very few of them wind up being winners. Think: New York Yankees.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 11:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If Erstad was good, then yes, I'd choose him. I think a better question would be...

 

A player who is a grinder, gives 110%, and plays good D with numbers something like .265, 25 HR, and 80 RBI

 

OR

 

A player who doesn't give it his all, plays decent D, but with numbers of .310, 30-40 HR, and 100+ RBI.

How many Erstad types hit 25 homers in a season?

 

Erstad did it once in a fluky year. Rowand has never done it. Byrnes had 26 last year. Eckstein's season high is 8.

Hmmm, good players or bad ones? tough f***in choice.

Hmmm, good players or bad ones? tough f***in choice.

I needed that laugh. Thank you.

Edited June 22, 200718 yr by SoxFan1

I needed that laugh. Thank you.

it's what i do...

If Erstad was good, then yes, I'd choose him. I think a better question would be...

 

A player who is a grinder, gives 110%, and plays good D with numbers something like .265, 25 HR, and 80 RBI

 

OR

 

A player who doesn't give it his all, plays decent D, but with numbers of .310, 30-40 HR, and 100+ RBI.

 

Ill take the player who doesn't give it his all every day..

 

The increased production makes up for the lack of trying by itself

I think Darrin is over the hill so I voted the other way.

I just don't think Erstad was a smart pick up.

We should trade him if anybody will take him and play some young guy even if the

young guy hits .195.

I'd rather watch a guy playing his heart out than a guy dogging it. Erstad type all the way.

I'm picking Erstad. According to Hawk and DJ, his ducksnorts are planned and an artform. Besides he starts everyday and leads off for the White Sox when he's healthy. If Aramis was on the Sox, where would he play?

This grinder stuff is so overhyped. Grind me out 30 homers and 100 rbis.

I don't get it, is this a trick question?

I picked Ramirez but that's only because it makes me happy when my favorite team wins baseball games.

I picked Ramirez but that's only because it makes me happy when my favorite team wins baseball games.

What are you implying? That having a huge slugger would win us more games? If thats the case why arent we winning?

 

 

I chose Erstad. I would rather have a player of his type kind of like an Ichiro or Johnny Damon hell even Curtis Granderson. I would say all sort of play somewhat similar, of course their numbers are different but Id rather have a player on the field who gives the full 100% than someone like Manny who definitely dogs it.

Edited June 22, 200718 yr by ChWRoCk2