To: cripplecreek; Former Proud Canadian
Which leads me to my original question that I posed when the Tigers acquired Scheffield. Why? The team was pretty good, and the only thing that stopped them from winning the whole shebang was a few choice fielding errors. And the fact that they didn’t hit worth a crap. But I digress...
35 posted on
06/03/2007 10:03:25 AM PDT by
AntiKev
("No damage. The world's still turning isn't it?" - Stereo Goes Stellar - Blow Me A Holloway)
To: AntiKev
Which leads me to my original question that I posed when the Tigers acquired Scheffield. Why?
He's still a strong bat.
37 posted on
06/03/2007 10:06:32 AM PDT by
cripplecreek
(Greed is NOT a conservative ideal.)
To: AntiKev
Which leads me to my original question that I posed when the Tigers acquired Scheffield. Why? They had a dissension-deficit...
41 posted on
06/03/2007 10:13:30 AM PDT by
johnny7
("But that one on the far left... he had crazy eyes")
To: AntiKev
Agreed. Getting Sheffield was not a smart move for Detroit. They had a real good balance of personalities; adding his huge salary could not have helped.
42 posted on
06/03/2007 10:14:06 AM PDT by
kjo
To: AntiKev
Here is why they got Sheffield. He is a professional hitter. Opponents actually fear this guy. As such he makes every hitter around him better. Guys are lining up to hit in front of Sheffield because the pitchers don't want to walk the man in front of him. Why do you think Polo is doing so well this year? He's getting more balls to hit. Who hits behind Sheffield? Ordonez, who is having a career year. Coincidence? I don't think so.
Besides his skill, Dombrowski and Leland love this guy. He helped them win a World Series in Florida.
56 posted on
06/04/2007 4:12:49 AM PDT by
Former Proud Canadian
(How do I change my screen name after Harper's election?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson