MLB Top 100 Right Now

[calsnowskier]

I think it is a testament to our balance. Duffy/Panik have been quality players for only a year. Pence should be on the list, though, to make it 6.

It is not inconceivable that next year we could have 10 players on the list. Seven regulars (all but the LF), and three SP's - Bum, Cutey, and Scrabble.

Gordon is on the list. Grichuk is on the list. Seagar is on the list. Kang is on the list.

 

[calsnowskier]

Did Freddie Freeman make the list? If not, I'm assuming there were no Braves.

Freeman did not make the list. They actually acknowledged that. The hosts mentioned that he gets hurt because he has no protection in the lineup, so he RBIs are VERY low, which makes him look like less of a player than he really is.

 

[Chewbaccer]

Freeman did not make the list. They actually acknowledged that. The hosts mentioned that he gets hurt because he has no protection in the lineup, so he RBIs are VERY low, which makes him look like less of a player than he really is.

Coming off a wrist injury that hampered him pretty much all season last year too. He should lead the league in walks this year given the fact that AJ Pierzynski could be the one behind him in the lineup.

 

[Mays-Fan]

You think Span is top-100 level?

I like his signing, but I dont have that level of excitement for him...

Bisbee thinks he will hit a million triples. That should count for something.

He could be top 100. I said it's conceivable. Not a certainty.

 

[calsnowskier]

Bisbee thinks he will hit a million triples. That should count for something.

He could be top 100. I said it's conceivable. Not a certainty.

If he hits a million triples, he deserves to be #1. Hell, he is the new GOAT...



Even Nick Lowery couldnt do THAT...

 

[Mays-Fan]

If he hits a million triples, he deserves to be #1. Hell, he is the new GOAT...



Even Nick Lowery couldnt do THAT...

Maybe I'm being overoptimistic, but I believe there will be a hitting synergy because of our lineup that has no holes. That will lift the status of all our players.

 

[msgkings322]

I was thinking the same thing about Pence........if there are 100 players in baseball better than Hunter Pence, then I am watching a totally different League than the crackpots at MLB Network.

I am going to look at it this way: The clownish "experts" at that network have been predicting the Dodgers as the favorites to win it all at this time of year for half a decade....that lends credence to the idea that they have no clue what they are talking about. lol

It's hard to predict baseball as we all know, but there are 30 teams, so being one of the 3 best players on your team on average gets you in the top 90. Is Pence our 3rd best player? Probably not.

 

[msgkings322]

As they go down the list, the hosts typically take a couple minutes to talk about each person (they skipped talking about Belt completely, though. That was weird...). When Bum was announced at #40, all 3 (Ripken, Darling and Amsinger) were all in agreement that he was WAY low on the list, and probably deserved a top 10 slot.

Come on guys, top 10? Top 20 perhaps. I can list 10 better easy and so can you.

 

[calsnowskier]

Come on guys, top 10? Top 20 perhaps. I can list 10 better easy and so can you.

I agree that top 10 is aggressive. But I was just commenting on what Ripken, Darling and Amsinger said. THEY said he should be top 10.

 

[calsnowskier]

It's hard to predict baseball as we all know, but there are 30 teams, so being one of the 3 best players on your team on average gets you in the top 90. Is Pence our 3rd best player? Probably not.

That assumes all teams are created equal, which is complete BS. The Giants are one of the elite teams that SHOULD pick up some of the slots left open by the Phillies, Brewers, Padres, etc.

 

[SFGRTB]

I agree that top 10 is aggressive. But I was just commenting on what Ripken, Darling and Amsinger said. THEY said he should be top 10.

I didn't watch the top 100 show, but they MAY have been referring that Bum should have been a top-10 starting pitcher. They did a positional top 10 before the top 100, and Bum was left off that list. Could be they were bringing that up once more.

 

[calsnowskier]

So Buster ended up at #7. I think that is basically fair.

Harper, Trout and 'shaw took the top 3 spots. Cutch, Donaldson and Goldy rounded out the top 6. Taking positional importance into account, I am not sure I agree with Goldy or Donaldson finishing above Buster, but that is nit-picking.

 

[calsnowskier]

I didn't watch the top 100 show, but they MAY have been referring that Bum should have been a top-10 starting pitcher. They did a positional top 10 before the top 100, and Bum was left off that list. Could be they were bringing that up once more.

Nope.

They said it was a travesty that he was left off that list, then added he should be in consideration for top 10 overall. They said he was "overlooked" because the "judges" did not take post-season into account. They argued that that was a BS stance, and that if you wanted one guy, for 1 game, Bum is THE guy you would take. Therefore, #40 was a joke.

 

[Mays-Fan]

Nope.

They said it was a travesty that he was left off that list, then added he should be in consideration for top 10 overall. They said he was "overlooked" because the "judges" did not take post-season into account. They argued that that was a BS stance, and that if you wanted one guy, for 1 game, Bum is THE guy you would take. Therefore, #40 was a joke.

I was going to make this point myself, almost verbatim.

The guy has given up 1 ER in 36 IP in the World Serious. That's an ERA of 0.25. Maybe that is just so good that not everyone can grasp what that means. The scary part is that I don't think we've seen the best of him yet.

 

[SFGRTB]

Nope.

They said it was a travesty that he was left off that list, then added he should be in consideration for top 10 overall. They said he was "overlooked" because the "judges" did not take post-season into account. They argued that that was a BS stance, and that if you wanted one guy, for 1 game, Bum is THE guy you would take. Therefore, #40 was a joke.

For sure. It's laughable that they don't take into account post-season success. This isn't fantasy rankings.

 

[Mays-Fan]

For sure. It's laughable that they don't take into account post-season success. This isn't fantasy rankings.

It's been a long time, in any sport, where I've seen another athlete dominate and perform as well as Bum did in the 2014 Series.

 

[SFGRTB]

I think it is wrong to leave Bryant off the list as well. But they already named Aronado. No way is he ranked higher than Arenado.

I saw Bryant was ranked 19th.

 

[calsnowskier]

I saw Bryant was ranked 19th.

Ahead of Arenado. Makes no sense. I have no prob with putting Bryant on the list. No way is he the #3 3B in the game and no way is he top 20 overall.

And again, not sure how you can include Bryant, Grichuk and Kang without including Duffy.

 

[Mays-Fan]

Ahead of Arenado. Makes no sense. I have no prob with putting Bryant on the list. No way is he the #3 3B in the game and no way is he top 20 overall.

And again, not sure how you can include Bryant, Grichuk and Kang without including Duffy.

Yeah, Grichuk is puzzling. MLB may be pimping some younger up-and-comers to generate interest. Maybe we had enough names and they filled their quota for the Giants. Duffy did kinda come from (relatively) nowhere - he was not high on anyone's radar outside the Giants community, if even there.

In the end, meh, it's a list to generate interest, to talk about who is on and who is left off. There's always going to be controversy - that is by intent and by its nature. I'm not sure I see any real travesties with this.

I'm ready see some real baseball played and let the real numbers do the talking. Go Giants!

 

[calsnowskier]

Of course there is no travesty. They could make the top 25 players all doggies, and it still wouldn't be a travesty. It is just a list.