Quote:
Originally Posted by Male30Dan
Man, I just don't get hating on the idea of signing Fielder. I too see the potential risks, but this is a young stud that has shown no issues with injury despite the large frame. I wonder how many of the 205 athletes from that list could say that they averaged 158 games over their career up to his age. I would guess literally none of them or, at best, 5%. Hell, I wonder how many MLB players at any size could say that...
Guy is a beast and Thiggy said it best - he would immediately be our best hitter. When you think about how many great hitters we have, that is saying something.
Bottom line - If he is available and the money can be spent without mortgaging the future (Josh leaving is NOT mortgaging the future by the way), then you absolutely positively sign this man.
|
I guess this will just be a 'time will tell' argument. He would immediately be making the most money of any ranger and plays marginal defense. To those who were upset at Napoli's firstbase blunders in the world series, you could expect similar things from Fielder. Also, since 2006 he has been the second worse baserunner in baseball, which seems to be a bad fit for the aggressive Rangers.
Again, not saying that he is a bad player just that his price-to-performance ratio isn't exactly what a good organization, with reasonable salary restrictions, would feel comfortable with. Sure if every team had the money of the Yankee's he would be signed in no time flat.
another good read:
http://www.bbtia.com/home/2012/1/20/...s-and-ham.html