Comments on: Kirby Puckett passes away

By: Joe

Joe — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 17:41:36 +0000

It’s sad of Kirby’s passing, he created a lot of wonderful memories and help gave us 2 world series. I saw on the news yesterday a cool painting of Kirby is being made, not sure it might be for the Twins.
It was sure great to watch him play always so excited and giving 100%, thanks Kirby for the memories.
Life Size Painting of Kirby Puckett

By: Ken

Ken — Sun, 12 Mar 2006 16:02:12 +0000

Yes, please pass the tissues Philip. Look, I have no problem at all when people disagree with me. But you certainly do. For whatever reason, you feel the need to deride and insult someone who posts something as innocuous as “batting average is overrated.” And you don’t even have the decency to offer a good reason – because you played in college, you know better than anyone else here. How is that supposed to convince anyone? THINK before you post. And don’t worry, I won’t post any grade school comebacks, your BS about who was picked when in gym class speaks volumes about you.

By: Josy

Josy — Sat, 11 Mar 2006 23:59:26 +0000

Give me your fifty…and then some.

My guess is you were never able to even catch a ball, and still have a plastic Dollar general glove to play slow pitch softball with.

By: Chris

Chris — Sat, 11 Mar 2006 04:50:55 +0000

Fifty bucks says Phillip never played beyond Legion ball.

By: Josy

Josy — Sat, 11 Mar 2006 01:56:16 +0000

Philip is awesome, I love him!!!

By: Philip

Philip — Sat, 11 Mar 2006 01:55:15 +0000

One more thing, “getting runs across is important”, that’s what your depth of baseball knowledge said, just before you said smart people have moved beyond rbi’s. Man I do wish I was as smart as you!!!
Gotta GO, HOPEFULLY NEVER HEAR FROM YOU AGAIN!!!!! Don’t worry you won’t hear from me, so don’t lose sleep trying to figure out one of your witty 5th grade comebacks.

By: Philip

Philip — Sat, 11 Mar 2006 01:49:32 +0000

Go somewhere else…need a tissue or what? Sorry I don’t watch and follow baseball as “intelligently” as you guys…I just played it forever, know the ins and outs, and can givea perspectuve that people who always wished they could play can’t.
But if you’re still mad about getting pick last for years in gym class, maybe I’ll leave you guys to your OBP and OPS…or your “intelligently, well thought, techinical, and absolutely perfect” opinions. Maybe I’ll go look at all the ballfields I actually played on and find my brain.
Sorry I can’t be a part of your cool club!

By: Philip

Philip — Sat, 11 Mar 2006 01:48:19 +0000

By: Ken

Ken — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 19:56:50 +0000

Some of you need to wake up. Yes, average is important, but not as much as not making an out and getting runs across the board. That’s why OBP and SLG (OPS) is the better gauge of performance.

Baseball and the people who intelligently follow it have moved past Avg/HR/RBI. If you’re going to disparage newer metrics or anything else that challenges how you think as just for “geeks” and “bloggers,” go somewhere else.

By: Philip

Philip — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 04:51:35 +0000

Apparently anyone who has followed this blog knows that someone put down Batting avg., someone said Puckett was overrated, and this all got confused.
The emohasis on Pucketts 2 rings was made by me…Puckett was “the man” on those championship teams. Jack Morris doesn’t pitch the best game 7 ever, without Puckett’s game 6.
I don’t think Darren was saying Ted Williams was only known for his average, but made a point to the guys who put avg. down that when you think of the “Splendid Splinter” more times than not the .400 avg. comes up.
Williams was great, so was Puckett.

By: GregD of Indy

GregD of Indy — Thu, 09 Mar 2006 20:15:51 +0000

Lucky hit theory wasn’t mine.
My point is that World Series rings do not define individual’s careers as winners and losers in baseball. Rings do not qualify you as a winner and lack of rings do not make you a loser. Apparently you should check out baseball history and see that Williams was known for WAY more than his one .400 season.

By: Darren

Darren — Wed, 08 Mar 2006 21:09:57 +0000

Kirby is a winner because he is a winner of 2 world series AND he is a great player. You are the one that said Williams is a loser because average means nothin. You make about as much sense as your lucky hit theory.

By: Philip

Philip — Wed, 08 Mar 2006 17:25:04 +0000

I never mentioned Williams, I;m not that dumb. The ring comment is for all the Puckett is overrated people.
And SCOTT SCUDDER RULES!!

By: Greg

Greg — Wed, 08 Mar 2006 15:33:25 +0000

So, basically Kirby Pucket is a winner because he has two world series rings, and Williams is a loser because he has none. OK – got it. Here’s another one for you….Scott Scudder > Ted Williams because Scudder has a world series ring.

I’m saying nothing negative about Puckett…he was a great hitter.

By: Philip

Philip — Wed, 08 Mar 2006 05:21:26 +0000

First thing thta comes to computer geeks minds is what is his ops-rdf-fdr-jfk avg and percentage. Ever heard the quote statistics are for losers. Thats what these new stats are, ways for losers to make themselves look better.
Puckett was a winner, 2 rings on those chubby fingers of his.