Rotinaj;1455417 wrote:I think they should just put Chapman at catcher. Hell just throw people out by 5 feet from his knees. Problem solved, youre welcome guys.
He would throw it at the base runners head
Rotinaj;1455417 wrote:I think they should just put Chapman at catcher. Hell just throw people out by 5 feet from his knees. Problem solved, youre welcome guys.
I'm ok with Santana over Hanigan if you want to go the offensive route, though his defense is atrocious. Talk to me about how good Gomes is when he has a track record to fall back on. Gomes would be starting over Santana if the Indians thought he was great defensively, because his offensive numbers project way above Santana, sans OBP.lhslep134;1455412 wrote:So lemme get this straight: 2 Reds fans (AZ and you) want to just ignore the fact that Gomes is as good or better defensively and ignore that Santana is light years better offensively, in order to put Hanigan in the lineup because the team "wouldn't need to rely on his bat (speaking of Santana)."
I don't think I need to say anything else besides: K.
Yea, Hanigan's career numbers are quite a bit better than Santana's, but Santana has had a good 57 games this year, so he's clearly the better player.SportsAndLady;1455442 wrote:Carlos Santana is a career .252 hitter lets not act like he's out of this world better offensively than hanigan.
You'd rather have Hanigan?se-alum;1455449 wrote:Yea, Hanigan's career numbers are quite a bit better than Santana's, but Santana has had a good 57 games this year, so he's clearly the better player.
I would have Hanigan and Santana.Commander of Awesome;1455457 wrote:You'd rather have Hanigan?
That wasn't the question.se-alum;1455465 wrote:I would have Hanigan and Santana.
SportsAndLady;1455442 wrote:Carlos Santana is a career .252 hitter lets not act like he's out of this world better offensively than hanigan.
Crimson streak;1455471 wrote:But yet he also averages over 20 hrs a season and a ridiculous OBP. And only in his 3rd full season. His average will only get better
Nope Hanigan's is clearly the better player. /SE-ACrimson streak;1455471 wrote:But yet he also averages over 20 hrs a season and a ridiculous OBP. And only in his 3rd full season. His average will only get better
That's awesome. Even at half that number he'll have the HR in a season record shortly.SportsAndLady;1455476 wrote:No he doesn't. He averages 15 HRs a game. He's only hit 20 HRs once in a season.
If I had to choose one, I would take Hanigan. I don't recommend having only one catcher on the team though.Commander of Awesome;1455470 wrote:That wasn't the question.
Thank you for clarifying something that wasn't asked. I asked which catcher you'd rather have. Didn't ask about 2 catchers.se-alum;1455483 wrote:If I had to choose one, I would take Hanigan. I don't recommend having only one catcher on the team though.
You are welcome.Commander of Awesome;1455494 wrote:Thank you for clarifying something that wasn't asked. I asked which catcher you'd rather have. Didn't ask about 2 catchers.
Reminded me of the Hamilton for Volquez trade or the Frank Robinson trade, haha.Terry_Tate;1455495 wrote:All of this just reminds me of the Jason Kipnis > Brandon Phillips talk, haha.
Swing and a miss...Commander of Awesome;1455497 wrote:Reminded me of the Hamilton for Volquez trade or the Frank Robinson trade, haha.
SportsAndLady;1455476 wrote:No he doesn't. He averages 15 HRs a game. He's only hit 20 HRs once in a season.
Talking about your little caveat about 2nd catcher bc you would obv rather have Santana as your catcher? lolfail SE. Continue being a bitter fail boy though.se-alum;1455505 wrote:Swing and a miss...
Terry_Tate;1455495 wrote:All of this just reminds me of the Jason Kipnis > Brandon Phillips talk, haha.
LOLse-alum;1455483 wrote:If I had to choose one, I would take Hanigan. I don't recommend having only one catcher on the team though.
wes_mantooth;1455510 wrote:Lol...exactly what I was thinking