Making the Team Meter for the Atlanta Braves hitters for week 3 of spring training shows us what the hitters have done the first two weeks of spring games. Go here for week 2 of the hitters MTM. I'll be taking some people off the list this week. I've removed Clint Sammons, Jordan Schafer, Freddie Freeman, and Cody Johnson, as they may still be on the spring roster, but barring injury they're not likely to make the team.
| Player, Position | This Week's Trend | Last Week | Notes and Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brooks Conrad, 2B |  |
|
He is still swinging a hot bat and helping his cause by playing second and third. His main competition, Thurston, is also having a good spring. This battle could go down to the wire. |
| Gregor Blanco, OF |  |
|
He has been largely unimpressive this spring. He's still way down there on the depth chart. |
| Brandon Hicks, SS | |
|
He doesn't have many hits, but he's impressed a lot of people in camp. He's probably nowhere near making the team, but he can certainly help his future prospects for making the Majors with a good showing this spring. |
| Joe Thurston, 2B | |
|
In the same boat with Conrad, and there's only room for one. Thurston is at a bit of a disadvantage because he's not on the 40-man, but he does have more experience as a pinch hitter and utility player than Conrad, and that could give him an edge. |
| Brent Clevlen, OF | |
|
He's getting a lot of playing time, but he's not doing much with it. We'll change him to going back down this week. |
| Jason Heyward, OF |  |
|
Poser. |
| Mitch Jones, OF | |
|
He had a big homerun the other day, but that's his only hit this spring. He needs to show everyone that he's not a one-dimensional player. |
| Matt Young, OF | |
|
He's got as many hits as M. Jones and Blanco combined in far fewer at-bats. I'm still rooting for him, and we'll keep him here to see what happens. |
| Arrow Key: |
|---|
| = Chance of making the team is waffling or 50-50. |
| = Chance of making the team is trending down. |
| = Chance of making the team is trending up. |
0 recs | 107 comments
Are the Braves going to carry a fifth outfielder, or is it really just down to Thurston/Conrad battle for the last spot?
ChrisK562 - March 11, 2010
Diaz, Melky, McLouth, Infante, Hinske. We need a backup infielder, as much as I would like to see Mitch Jones on the roster, I think we go with either Conrad or Thurston. As Gondee said, Conrad has a leg up on everyone, since he is already on the 40-man.
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
Oh, and I forgot possibly Heyward.
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
"possibly"...
HA!
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
THIS
J-Freak - March 11, 2010
How long til we take Heyward off the meter?
kreese555 - March 11, 2010
Probably when we know for sure if he will make the team or not…
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
So, now? :-)
kreese555 - March 12, 2010
First post, so be nice - so who's this Heyward kid?
Seems like a flash in the pan to me….LMAO!!!
DolphinNation - March 11, 2010
Welcome. I’ve been asking that same question about Heyward myself…
gondeee - March 11, 2010
So pumped to watch Braves Yankees tonight. I'd be pumped if Heyward hit a bomb
nick9314 - March 11, 2010
HOW MANY WILL MAKE IT?
Off of this list? How many open spots are there?
Just one outfielder and one infielder?
HalleyGator - March 11, 2010
Probably yeah...
and the one OF seems pretty easy to figure.
Add Heyward, with McLouth, Ross, McCann, Cabrera, Diaz, Hinske, Infante, Jones, Glaus, Escobar, Prado, and you’re left with just one more spot (likely an IF such as Conrad or Thurston although both could likely play LF if needed). That is if they have a 12 man pitching staff.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
Plus, if Chris Resop makes the team, thats added depth in left field.
10-4 - March 11, 2010
13 pitchers to start the season?
Does Bobby normally break spring training with 12 pitchers on the roster or does he often add the 13th for the first month of the season? If we break with 13 pitchers then neither Conrad nor Thurston make the club. I’m pulling for Conrad.
KC Ryan - March 11, 2010
I don’t think we’ve ever gone with a 13-man pitching staff except for short little bursts under rare circumstances, like after those marathon 18-inning games when we need a fresh arm more than a bench guy. Especially not out of spring training where a starter could conceivably be skipped the first time thru the rotation due to that off-day and therefore can be an emergency reliever if all hell breaks loose on the pitching staff in the first week. You can pretty much bank on 5 starters, 7 BP, 8 position starters and 5 bench guys.
J-Freak - March 11, 2010
Thurston’s minor league stolen base numbers are some of the worst I’ve ever seen. 20/38, 17/32, 6/13, 1/13 (!).
dutchschultz - March 11, 2010
He’s like the little engine that couldn’t and should have stopped trying to steal a few years ago.
Go Conrad!
Sparhawk - March 11, 2010
After how Conrad is raking the ball this spring, does anyone really think Thurston has a chance? Granted he is hitting good, but Conrad provides more power potential off the bench.
bashby20sh - March 11, 2010
+1
Brooks power potential should override any kind of veteran points Thurston is getting..
bwellnjonesco - March 11, 2010
Brooksie is on fire!!
Gotta go with him at this point.
HalleyGator - March 11, 2010
Thurston's throw
to Infante Tuesday night makes me want Conrad on the team over Thurston. That looked pretty bone-headed to me. Conrad seems to need regular playing time/ AB’s to contribute at the plate. I hope he can deal with the bench time the 25th spot brings with it.
bighop - March 11, 2010
Yeah, it’s Brooks’s job to lose IMO.
P.S. Can we trade Saito to the Twins? ;-)
pancanbra - March 11, 2010
Twins
With the Braves “surplus” I’m a little surprised there has been no rumor of Saito, Moylan, Kimbrel or maybe even Medlen.
bighop - March 11, 2010
No...
as a free agent signing I believe he’s ours until June. Plus, why would we want to move KK’s BFF?
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
Because me no likey what I see so far from the 40 year old “setup man.”
pancanbra - March 11, 2010
That signing was f*cking stupid.
Scott Coleman - March 11, 2010 via mobile
watch out...
justin will rip you for using hindsight and challenging an “opinion”.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
haha, this should be good
Smoltz's Beard - March 11, 2010
Haha
I’ve never liked that signing since the day after we signed him. At first I was kinda excited, but then i thought about it.
Scott Coleman - March 11, 2010 via mobile
Sharpens stick...
prepares for jabbing.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
You better get a trident or some shit just to be safe.
Scott Coleman - March 11, 2010 via mobile
haha
agreed
bluelg - March 11, 2010
No. I won’t. Because this isn’t hind-sight and Saito was completely unecessary at the time of the signing.
I didn’t like the signing at the time, and I don’t really care for it now.
However, if we start saying that Troy Glaus was a stupid signing sometime in August, then I will rip someone a new one.
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
Ah, so because you agree, this one is valid...
I get it now.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
1. Did you complain about trading for Tex when it happened?
2. Did you complain about signing Derek Lowe when it happened?
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
I bitched and moaned
when we signed Lowe. $15m until he’s 40. And that success was in Dodger stadium
nathan rothschild - March 11, 2010
Fair enough. Then you are one of the few who may be proven correct over time. However, I dare say that you do not consider Derek Lowe one of the worst signings in baseball – especially considering what the market brought to SPs that year.
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
Also when Barry Zito got 7 years and $126 million a few years back. Which would you rather have..Lowe at $15 million per year, or Zito at $18.5MM, $18.5MM, $19MM, $20MM and $18MM. I’d rather take Lowe. I’d even take Lowe over 2 years at $12MM per year for Oliver Perez.
I fully expect Lowe to be just fine this year. Is he an ace? No he’s not an ace. And yeah, maybe it does stink that we are paying $15MM to a non-ace…but what are you going to do?
dunnytwogloves - March 11, 2010
Now those are probably two of the worst...
although Zito is hard to say as a bad signing at the time of the deal. Maybe too pricey, but he was a solid workhorse in Oakland and coming from the AL to the NL you’d expect his numbers to improve not decline.
IMO, the one 20/20 hindsight move is asking for Morales instead of Kotchman from the Angels. At the time, Kotchman looked like the better pick up, but as things have played out afterwards it clearly was the wrong choice of their young 1B.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
Now that, we agree on, but still at the time, asking for Kotch was the better decision – given all of the current data.
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
Why the "but"...
as I say there-“At the time, Kotchman looked like the better pick up”.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
I wasn’t disagreeing…
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
:)
Even when you two agree, you disagree!! haha
dunnytwogloves - March 11, 2010
No, I think that is quite easily reserved for Mike Hampton.
crosby - March 14, 2010
1. Yes, I did. As I’ve already covered with you multiple times, I felt AT THE TIME, there were more holes to fill than Tex and Mahay could satisfy, primarily the starting staff after Hudson and Smoltz but also a lack of a leadoff option and a thin bullpen. Mahay helped the bullpen some, but it was still thin even with him as Wickman turned to useless fat.
2. Yes, I did. I liked the signing of Lowe, but disagreed with the length and overall value. At that price and length considering his age, I’d have passed and felt so AT THE TIME. I didn’t think either he or Burnett were worth the offers they got, and felt so AT THE TIME OF THE SIGNING.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
So, what would you have done differently? Go into the season banking that Glavine and Hudson would be able to pitch? Bank that Hanson would be good as a rookie who never had really pitched above AAA?
Perhaps we should have offered Oliver Perez a contract?
I mean, it is easy to complain about moves, but it is amusing that rarely do people offer any alternative solutions.
The simple view says that Lowe was the best FA pitcher available. SP is what had been costing us wins over the previous 2 seasons (both in terms of durability and talent). It seems to me that if an organization has a glaring weakness and they sign the best available player to fill that void, it has to be considered a good move at the time.
We can debate (and there really isn’t much of a debate) that he is overpaid, but I would rather my team overpay for the best available guy than to be stingy Scrooges and sign a lesser talent.
I mean, we complain all the time about our payroll and long for the days of “Big Money Ted” again, yet we criticize the big moves that the FO makes in an effort to become better.
And it isn’t like we are talking about a horrible contract (like the one that Perez managed to get). Yes, the contract is a bit larger than what we would like, but we are getting a quality pitcher. No, we don’t have the “ace” that he is being paid to be, but we knew that at the time.
I just don’t get how we can call the signing of Derek Lowe the worst move ever by Frank Wren – especially considering that Lowe played on the same team that Garret Anderson was on.
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
In short, yes...
If Lowe demanded that price, I pass and see if he comes down or someone else offers that length and amount to him. I understand Ted isn’t paying the bills these days. And the difference between FUGA and Lowe is length. That’s where I’d have the big problem. If he demands $15m, maybe 2 years, possibly a 3rd as an option, but not through age 40. Lowe is a sinker pitcher coming off a strong season, but I just wouldn’t trust paying that much for that long to a starter that isn’t absolutely elite (like Roger on roids).
Oliver is a joke at that price, let Omar pay it. Although I would have been interested in him as a young guy with potential.
As we’ve discussed, I’d take the gamble on KK, Javy, and Jair up front, with Hanson, Medlen, Glavine, and Jojo battling it out for the other two spots. You still had Huddy likely coming back to boost down the stretch or maybe supplant a kid if you were wary of piling on their workload. And Charlie Morton was also in the mix before getting dealt mid year for McLouth, so he was a competent option too. I can’t recall when James Parr went down, but he could join Medlen, Hanson, Jojo, and Morton in that battle for the 4th/5th spot. Jon Garland was a cheaper option, as was Carl Pavano if you are simply looking for durability, as would Brad Penny. Obviously 20/20 hindsight says Randy Wolf would have been the best we could have signed, in production and future flexibility when he came off the books. But at the time, I’d have preferred any of those 4 on 1 yr deals vs. Lowe at 4 yrs and that price.
So yes, options were available besides going for the best in the market. Bay and Holliday were the best free agents this year, but instead of committing big money for many years to them, we used cheaper deals on Glaus, Hinske, Saito to allow flexibility going forward. It seems like Wren has spent the last two offseasons trying to correct mistakes from the previous winter.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
On Oliver Perez...
just to clarify, I’d have been interested, until he started asking for multiple years of 8 figures. Short term, for 5-8, I’d take the gamble he finds consistency and control, but “I would have been interested in him as a young guy with potential” means at a price tag far below what Minaya paid him. But then, that’s why we love Omar Minaya.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
Did you just use Carl Pavano and durability in the same sentence??
dunnytwogloves - March 11, 2010
He did have 199 innings last year...
although he did struggle in New York to stay healthy.
I’d have wanted Wolf, Penny or Garland before him though, he’d have been farther down the list. But considering the other near ready Ps we had in Reyes, Morton, Hanson, Medlen, and Parr, I’d have been willing to take Pavano on a cheap one year deal vs Lowe for 4. Maybe I’d lose, but I’d at least have the flexibility for this year as Hanson, and the other kids matured.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
Garland? Yuck, absolutely not. I was a big Wolf proponent though.
Smoltz's Beard - March 11, 2010
He's not great,...
but his numbers aren’t horrible, and he’d accept a one year deal. Between him and Penny, both are ugh, but in my mind the one year makes them more tolerable than Lowe for 4 years. Lowe is definitely better, but the length of the deal, considering the young arms we had coming up, is the difference maker.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
But that’s just it. In order to get Lowe for 2009, we had to sign him through 2012. I would much rather have him and worry about trying to get rid of him later than to miss out on him and be stuck with a John Garland type.
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
And that is where we differ...
if Lowe demands 4 years, I pass and move on. If someone else is willing to pay him that much for that long, so be it, but not me. Garland isn’t ideal, but he (or Penny, or Wolf) fill the void for a year and you have the following year to figure out when the time comes. A year where you’d have an option for Huddy, KK signed, Javy signed, Hanson would certainly be ready by then, among others, and then Jurrjens.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
This makes me think of the current debate over Joe Johnson...
with the Hawks. And if you care to check out peachtreehoops, you’ll see my stance is consistent on this. If someone you think is getting at the tip point in age, pass on the long term deal and move on. If you trust your scouts and front office people, they can find suitable players to fill the void.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
And I was remembering his Marlin days...
where he was durable. I try to not pay attention to the Yankees when I can.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
Not trying to elbow myself into this disaster of a conversation...
…but I believe Justin and I have similar views on the Tex trade, could be wrong, in that the most frustrating part is how angry people are that we gave up Feliz and Andrus when at the time these same people knew nothing about them. These people were more upset about losing Salty and Harrison (sorry Beau, don’t think anyone was upset about losing you).
Now they’ll constantly bitch and moan about losing Feliz and Andrus like the two guys were mortal locks, while purposefully leaving Salty and Harrison (the two guys that, many years ago, were the initial crux of their adamant stance against the trade) out of the equation simply because they no longer help support their point
That’s what makes me so irate about the entire situation, the sheer fickleness of the majority of people bringing up the damn trade…but I’ve learned to accept the presence of those people when it comes to the good ole’ MLB, along with most other things in life.
Smoltz's Beard - March 11, 2010
None of those folks were me...
Andrus and Felix were the prime guys to me. We always have solid lefties like Harrison, and Salty is the price you have to pay in prospects for a bat like Tex. Besides, I knew Salty was trade bait when they kept talking about how much more value he had at C when we were in dire need of someone at 1B. But in my mind, it was kind of a total package thing. Why shell out that boatload of guys for a move that won’t win a World Series?
I guess that is the primary disagreement between us. Y’all thought we needed a 1B to ensure the postseason and a possible World Series. I felt we needed much, much more, and wouldn’t want to spend the cost of a bright future for a chance at getting eliminated in round 1 at best.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
Didn't say you were.
If you truly were one of the people who had their sights set on Andrus and Feliz that long ago, not saying you weren’t…no point arguing that at this juncture, then you were one of what I imagine to be a small group of people. Even most of the so-called experts commented right from the get go about their risk/reward status.
The fact is that there’s too many people these days arguing against the trade who are altering their views based on how things have panned out since then. And those people are scum. I’m sorry, that’s probably too harsh. No, I stand by that…scum.
Did I think it was a good trade at the time? Yes. Does it look like I was wrong? Yup, it certainly is shaping up to be that way, but we won’t truly know until we see if Andrus and Feliz are in fact the “real deal”.
Smoltz's Beard - March 11, 2010
I was higher on Andrus than Feliz...
but a kid throwing 100 mph gas always intrigues me. And of course Andrus had been hyped up since day 1, so I was anxious about him. And I must say it wasn’t so much the individuals (although to me they were the pieces I thought had the most potential), as it was the entire package when we still had other holes to fill like leadoff, another starter, and another bullpen arm if not bonafide closer to replace Wickman. IMO, we’d have been better off sellers at the time (just because in my eyes it’s World Series or bust), or best case just stand pat and see what we could do before the next batch of kids came ready.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
I totally agree with your #1. I thought pitching was more important at the time. Although I was definitely excited about getting a hitter of Tex’ caliber.
As for Lowe, I had the same trepidation, but I didn’t feel like there was much choice – IF we were trying to compete in 2009. I really didn’t like the KK signing, as it appeared to be overkill and he was unproven and I would rather have Morton as my 5th starter plus the extra ~$6million. (I really liked Morton, and I wanted to see him get the chance to develop with the Braves). Just my $0.02…
buzzdeadwax - March 11, 2010
To say that Thurston is also hitting well, relative to Conrad, is like saying that Gregor Blanco is also a good prospect, relative to Heyward.
Thurston is slugging .313 this spring, with a .353 OBP (his OPS is evil). Conrad’s line is .389/.476/.722(!) which makes a 1.198 OPS. Already has 3 doubles and a HR, and he’s generally playing earlier in games and facing better pitching.
Bronn - March 11, 2010
What happened to Conrad in Sept?
Seemed like he struggled really bad by not playing regularly. Reminded me of KJ during a bad streak actually. When Conrad plays a few days he’s pretty good, coming off the bench he struggles. Or am I missing something?
bighop - March 11, 2010
Nothing happened
He’s just not very good at hitting baseballs. There’s a reason the guy is 30 years old and still qualifies as a rookie.
dutchschultz - March 11, 2010
Ignorance is fun.
cbwilk - March 11, 2010
Conrad was hitless after his 2 week wonder-stretch. It was something like an 0-20-ish slump. Let’s not get too carried away with his March success.
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
March success
That’s the problem. He’s getting AB’s and doing well. If he gets the 25th spot, he won’t be getting the AB’s and could transform into the 0-22 Sept Conrad. I’m not sure we wouldn’t be better off with Conrad at AAA until an extended need arises. I’m a Conrad fan, but it seems to me that he needs regular playing time to do well.
bighop - March 11, 2010
Yeah. Sitting him on the bench isn’t good for him, IMO – much the same way that sitting Gerg Norton last year wasn’t good for him.
The difference in GN from 2008 and 2009 was playing time.
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
Norton
I hadn’t put that together, good point. KJ was the same way. A day or 2 off and he took a week to get going again.(slight exaggeration).
bighop - March 11, 2010
But wouldn't that apply more towards...
Hinske, Infante, or Cabrera, as you’d assume they’d get the majority of pinch hit at bats over Conrad.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
yeah
They would get more pinch hit at bats than Conrad, making Conrad more succeptable to the Sept problems he had. I’m thinking we’d be better off with Conrad at AAA until a regular need (15 day DL) arises.
bighop - March 11, 2010
This.
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
the positions and who can play what...
1st-glaus, prado, hinske
2nd- prado, infante
SS- escobar, infante
3B- chipper, infante, prado, glaus
LF-diaz, melky, hinske, infante
CF- mclouth, melky, infante
RF- heyward, melky, diaz
if chipper goes down, it sends this whole chart into a mad scramble because infante probably has to become the regular 2b moving prado to 3b, however wouldnt it be feasible to give the last bench spot whoever’s been hot in spring?
point being, the last bench spot shouldn’t go to a player because he can play a certain position. it should go to a player that can be productive off the bench. as of right now, on any given day, there will be 4 capable pinch hitters, but really no capable pinch runners.
matt young could be useful: high obp and a decent baserunner (sb% has been much better the past 2 years).
ryan c - March 11, 2010
If Chipper goes down, Glaus slides to 3B and Hinkse becomes the 1B.
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
not so sure...
i’d be willing to be glaus stays put due to injury risk.
ryan c - March 11, 2010
Not Heyward? I think he could handle 3B and RF for a few weeks.
Scott Coleman - March 11, 2010 via mobile
actually...
i vote that we have a pitcher, a catcher, and heyward on the field.
ryan c - March 11, 2010
We're talking the very last bench spot...
how often is he gonna be used unless injuries force them into action? There is a reason they are the 25th spot, not higher up the pecking order.
Mr. Sanchez - March 11, 2010
If Chip goes down
we most likely will be bringing up someone to play 3B full time or trade for someone. They would probably bring up whoever is the AAA 3B or just use Thurston
drumzalicious - March 11, 2010
If he goes down in the second half of the year, I think the first thing they do is check what kind of year Freeman’s had- if it’s late July and Freeman’d been tearing the cover off the ball, there’s at least a decent chance they shift Glaus back to the hot corner and give Freeman his first callup.
J-Freak - March 12, 2010
also...
bobby likes to utilize the pinch runner. who’s he going to use?
ryan c - March 11, 2010
Ha! Tim
Scott Coleman - March 11, 2010 via mobile
Ha! Tim Dierkes just said Heyward wouldn't win ROY
Yeah, okay.
Scott Coleman - March 11, 2010 via mobile
I have a Fantasy Baseball magazine – called 2010 Major League Baseball Yearbook and Fantasy Guide – and in it are 6 “experts” who predict all of the major awards.
The “Experts” are: Tim Gramling, Steve Bennett, Ed Hubbard, Brian Grambling, Greg Ruehlmann and Scott Zoback.
These are their NL ROY winners:
Alcides Escobar – 4 votes
Ian Desmond – 1 vote
Buster Posey – 1 vote
Really???
justincredubil02 - March 11, 2010
And to think they get paid for their baseball coverage.
Scott Coleman - March 11, 2010 via mobile
In fairness
they might not have taken into account Heyward starting the year here. If they were assuming we’d SuperTwo him and he’d be down for 2 months, the Escobar and Posey picks make sense. But IAN DESMOND? Are they bloody serious? His minor league career numbers are not very good, and though there’s some oomph toward the end, from most of what I read about him there are serious doubts he’ll maintain any kind of high level play in the bigs. That is a WAY overrated pick.
J-Freak - March 11, 2010
whats crazy
is that if Heyward walks a ton and doesnt get a lot of HR’s they will probably say “He can hit and get on base but has no power for his position”
I mean I would rather him swing at good pitches instead occasionally getting lucky on a bad one and hitting it out the park.
drumzalicious - March 11, 2010
May be crazy, but...
… that’s strong in my thinking for a fantasy baseball draft position. Walks don’t count and walks seldom cause RBIs. It’s obviously valuable for the team (and I’m happy to see a guy with patience!), but not as much for a Roto league. ROY voters might think the same way.
carpengui - March 12, 2010
That’s why I prefer leagues with OBP instead of Avg.
justincredubil02 - March 12, 2010
+1
Smoltz's Beard - March 12, 2010
It certainly made a difference in his draft status...
thankfully
Mr. Sanchez - March 12, 2010
Is it possible to win MVP and ROY in the same year?
If not, this might have been Dierkes’ thinking…
kreese555 - March 12, 2010
Pretty sure it’s been done before…can’t pull it at the moment
Smoltz's Beard - March 12, 2010
Fred Lynn for the Red Sox back in the 70s...
and then Ichiro.
Mr. Sanchez - March 12, 2010
Wasn't Cal Ripken Jr....
ROY and MVP of the World Series?
kreese555 - March 12, 2010
nope...
82 rookie of the year, they didn’t make the playoffs that year.
83 they did, and he won the regular season MVP that year too.
Mr. Sanchez - March 12, 2010
Ahh, I stand corrected.
I do have his ‘82 rookie card in mint condition. Wonder what that’s worth now? Think it’s Fleer.
kreese555 - March 13, 2010
Nope, it's Donruss.
kreese555 - March 13, 2010
Modern baseball cards aren’t worth anything.
cbwilk - March 13, 2010
Lies.
blitzerlover - March 13, 2010
Logan
I would love to see one of those “Player Preview” articles on Jordan Schafer….
scorby911 - March 11, 2010
Well if he's healthy
He’ll play almost all year in AAA.
Scott Coleman - March 11, 2010 via mobile
I'm getting that same impression...
especially as we see reports saying he might miss the first few weeks or more before getting to Gwinnett.
Mr. Sanchez - March 12, 2010
Gondeee…. can I just say what an EXCELLENT thing you’re doing here.
Love the format – what a great idea to help all of us stay informed with what’s going on that aren’t able to attend or keep up with the games.
NCChopper - March 11, 2010
And I laughed out loud at the “poser” comment.
NCChopper - March 11, 2010
Welcome back, good to see you are still alive and well.
I sure missed you around here during the off season.
HEYJUDE - March 12, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Talking Chop to post a comment.