The J.T. Snow Debate (This is for you, Richard)

[retep]

So, JT's totals over his prime:

(95) 24 HR, 102 RBI
(96) 17 HR, 67 RBI
(97) 28 HR, 104 RBI
(98) 15 HR, 79 RBI
(99) 24 HR, 98 RBI
(00) 19 HR, 96 RBI

(And keep in mind that this is all as a 6 or 7 place hitter.)

Ok, and the he does trail off. But he was still a productive hitter; lets use thew A's favorite stat, OBP.

(01) .371
(02) .344
(03) .387
(04) .429
(05) .343

[Joe shmoe]

well snow was a number 5 hitter mainly with some bouts batting 3, 4, and 6, which makes the rbi counts a lot less impressive.

i just believe that a good first baseman should break 30hr and 100rbis

i would take giambi over snow anyday, as giambi is a sub par fielding first baseman, and snow is a subpar hitting first baseman

[retep]

well snow was a number 5 hitter mainly with some bouts batting 3, 4, and 6, which makes the rbi counts a lot less impressive.

Durring his years with the Giants, Bonds hit mostly 3rd with Kent 4th. Snow was 5th some of the time, but also Ellis Burks, Benito Santiago, Rich Aurillia, Reggie Sanders, and others took the 5th spot.

i just believe that a good first baseman should break 30hr and 100rbis

I think that standard is way too high. A very above average player gets 30HR and 100RBI. Most teams do not have that.

i would take giambi over snow any day

Well, yeah! I would take Giambi over most any other player any day! But you can't take one of the most dynamic offensive players of the decade and use that as a standard. Giambi is an exceptional hitter.

as giambi is a sub par fielding first baseman, and snow is a subpar hitting first baseman

I think you are downplaying Snow's defense. Many people have credited J.T. Snow for being one of the top defensive 1B ever; while Giambi is a star of his era, there are not too many claims that Giambi is the best ever at anything.


But I disregard the argument that some positions are "offensive" and some are "defensive." It was once assumed that shortstops, second-basemen, catchers, and maybe one of the left fielders were "defensive," while the others would provide the offensive production.

So when the Giant's top three offensive providers were Bonds (LF) Kent (2B) and Auirllia (SS), you could say that they could afford to spend of defense, so Snow having below-average numbers is not so important.

Baseball is all about balance-- balancing the need for defense and offense. Obviously, you wouldn't take Snow as a 1B on a team like the Nationals (or the 2007 Giants) who need an offensive key.

I think that it's worth noting that for all the years of griping about Snow, the Giants have had one of the least productive 1B spots in the MLB; this season, SF has a grand total of 1 HR from that position.

Who hit it? Auirllia, their former shortstop.

Someone help me out here--I know Scott is a believer!