Church Feeling the Pressure From Snelling

[Senators2005]

And as long as we're talking about people being entitled to their opinion how about letting me express mine.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion about players and the game - but not so much about other members of the forum especially if it will do nothing but cause anger and ruin the conversation aspect of the thread.

[tomterp]

I'm not offended by any posts. I just think the Church worship is pathetic.

I certainly grant that there were some Church fans here long before the tidbit about his being a memeber of this forum was leaked. But it cannot be denied or overlooked that the Church smooching escalated to another level since that was revealed. If you are not a devout member of the recently founded Church of the Annointed Starting Left Fielder then don't take offense. I'm a fan of the Washington Nationals not of any individual players. I gave that up around the time I turned 13 or 14. And as long as we're talking about people being entitled to their opinion how about letting me express mine.

Sure, express your opinion, but could you dispense with the insults liberally sprinkled in each of your posts on the subject?  Ok, you don't like Church, we get the message.  My message is, I base my support for Ryan playing on his demonstrated performance over the last two years at the major league level.  That's it.  Last year he had 196 at bats, 10 HR and 35 RBI.  A full season equates to 30 HR and 105 RBI.  I think the Nats need that sort of production from our outfielders, that's why I advocate for Church playing a LOT.  

If you disagree with conclusions regarding Church or any other player, try basing them on facts, analysis, observation, whatever positive insights you can bring to the forum.  So far, all you've contributed on the subject is garbage.

[JMW IV]

And as long as we're talking about people being entitled to their opinion how about letting me express mine.

if you are going to express an opinion, and insult others by calling them things like "butt-smoochers" and "pathetic", then you should be prepared to have it thrown back in your face. 

how about that?

your "insult everyone then play the persecution card when someone shoots back" act is getting tiring.

[nats2playoffs]

What the Nationals saw last year was Church's batting average drop to .215 by May 19.  He had ZERO home runs between Apr 19 and May 19 and only 2 RBIs.  He was striking out close to 30% of the time.  When they made the decision to send him to the minors, they probably extrapolated that slump to continue throughout the season.  In 2006, he batted .215 in AA and .246 in AAA.  His overall positive home run and RBI rates actually were pretty consistent in the minors, and his strikeout rate declined. 

So maybe Church's home runs and RBIs will extrapolate to good numbers in 2007, with a much lower BA.  But right now, Snelling is doing everything we'd hoped that Church would do, and much more.  It makes no sense to bench someone who is red hot, in favor of someone who has been slumping and has a history of doing so.
 

[JMW IV]

But right now, Snelling is doing everything we'd hoped that Church would do, and much more.  It makes no sense to bench someone who is red hot, in favor of someone who has been slumping and has a history of doing so.
 

agreed.

[tomterp]

It is only fair to point out that Church is not the only one off to a slow start.  F. Lopez is hitting .167, and Logan .222 so far.  Belliard is around .214.  We know all of these guys can do better, and we're going to play them until they do (or we just can't stand it any longer).  The Nats need all of these guys contributing, so the goal is not to replace them, but to push the right buttons to get them back in the groove.

[spidernat]

if you are going to express an opinion, and insult others by calling them things like "butt-smoochers" and "pathetic", then you should be prepared to have it thrown back in your face. 

how about that?

your "insult everyone then play the persecution card when someone shoots back" act is getting tiring.

Never played any sort of 'persecution' card. Considering that I really only know one person from this message board it doesn't matter to me what is said or believe about me. My point was merely that some of you have a tendency to go over board and I think it has to do with the fact that Church and Hill view this space from time to time. If you are not butt smooching Church because you happen to know that he views this board then you have nothing to be offended about.

Also, I never said I don't like Church. I said this once before and I'll repeat it here, I really hope Church turns it on and makes a fool out of me. That would benefit my Nats and that's all I care about. I will happily eat crow if that were to happen. I just don't bow down to anyone, even if they happen to be a member of this board.

[spidernat]

I think that is a fasinating topic to discuss: do you have favorite players anymore or do you just follow the faceless franchise entity?  Why or why not?

What happened to the days of people annointing their heroes and latching on to players like the Dago, Roberto Clemente, Nolan Ryan, or a Cal Ripken Jr.?  Do heroes still exist or has the politics, stats, and endless desire to win at any cost robbed the American Pastime of its final innocence?

For me the idea of heroes died a quick death when I became a teenager. But that's just me and I will quickly acknowledge that I'm a 'weird' character. But for most people, I think the politics, the money, and the prima donna attitude of the modern player have effectively killed the love affair between the players and their fans.

[nats2playoffs]

It is only fair to point out that Church is not the only one off to a slow start...

I agree, and I already said that the outfielder I'd bench now would probably be Logan.  A decision like this doesn't have to be all or nothing, either.  With our top pitchers or in a tight game where defense matters, I'd use Logan.  When we are further down in the pitching rotation, and need runs to keep up, Church is more likely to get RBIs and HRs, even if his BA is low.  I don't know if Bowden or Acta have seen Church's day-night stats, but he'd be a definite starter in every single day game.  (Go to Church every Sunday.)  Right now, I'd use Snelling every day until he goes cold. 

[JMW IV]

My point was merely that some of you have a tendency to go over board and I think it has to do with the fact that Church and Hill view this space from time to time.
 

that's a faulty opinion.

especially considering that 1) the Board in general has supported Church long before he even knew the board existed. 2) This is the not the only board with Church supporters on it.

posters supporting Church and wanting him to have a full, season-long shot as a starter is NOT something that just came about because someone figured out a few weeks ago the Church looked at the board once.  that's been the general sentiment ever since he came back from running into that wall in 2005.

sure you can express your opinion all you like. it just happens to be completely wrong.

[Dave B]

Sure, express your opinion, but could you dispense with the insults liberally sprinkled in each of your posts on the subject?  Ok, you don't like Church, we get the message.  My message is, I base my support for Ryan playing on his demonstrated performance over the last two years at the major league level.  That's it.  Last year he had 196 at bats, 10 HR and 35 RBI.  A full season equates to 30 HR and 105 RBI.  I think the Nats need that sort of production from our outfielders, that's why I advocate for Church playing a LOT.  

If you disagree with conclusions regarding Church or any other player, try basing them on facts, analysis, observation, whatever positive insights you can bring to the forum.  So far, all you've contributed on the subject is garbage.

I think you are basing you Church projections on about 3 months of performance. As I've said before it is not a large sample.

Lopez was an all star and has played well for years.  Belliard has been OK for years.  Logan plays very good defense.  Church has had a an average 2 years. And to me, that doesnt warrant any preferential treatment.

Man, people really dont like to be called butt kissers? That got out of hand real fast.  And the harsh defense kinda makes it look like it hit close to home *ducks*

[Nat of the Living Dead]

I see nothing wrong with someone rooting for the team AND an "individual player."  It doesn't matter the reason you do it whether its the potential you see in a player, they did something to wow you, or they left their mark on you in some way.  I like Church and want to see him in LF but I completely understand if Acta moves a player in there who is a better fit or performing better for the sake of the team.

Church fans love him but I don't think one person here has said he MUST be put in LF no matter what, which some posters are accusing some of.

[tomterp]

I think you are basing you Church projections on about 3 months of performance. As I've said before it is not a large sample.

Well, you can judge a player on 527 major league at bats, 196 of them occuring in 2006, or 41 spring training at bats. Which is the more valid sample size?

[Dave B]

Well, you can judge a player on 527 major league at bats, 196 of them occuring in 2006, or 41 spring training at bats. Which is the more valid sample size?

Why do we have to draw conclusions right now? Church is just another guy looking for a job to me.  Do you want to throw in some minor league stats?

[tomterp]

You are always going to choose the players for your team based on what you think they can do for your going forward.  Unfortunately, since we can't see into the future, teams base decisions based on the past.  Real recent past includes spring training, of course.  This is a judgement thing, it's hard to make the right decision always, but you go with what you've got.  That means how hot is a player now, what they've proved in the past, and how old they are.  The older a player is, the more you discount recent seasons, cause they figure to be in sharp decline, so you really go by the most recent trend.  Both Church and Snelling figure to be in their prime, so all recent data is relevant.

Anyway, I don't object at all to a discussion about who should start or who shoudn't.  That's what these forums are for.  But I don't quite get the point of prefacing arguments with insults or derogatory comments intended to impugn the motives of those who might argue against your point.  If you can't make your argument on the merits, than you have no argument to make.

[Dave B]

Snelling throwing a guy out, game winning walk.  Big HR last week. Can I call him a gamer?

[Kenz aFan]

I see nothing wrong with someone rooting for the team AND an "individual player."

I agree 100% with that statement, but often times fans forget, that using past numbers, especially from a relatively small sample, for any player, and one who's yet to prove his worth on a day-to-day basis, means absolutely nothing.

Yes, Church has had flashes of brilliance, but so have countless others before him who's names no one remembers. Yes, Snelling, when healthy is an exciting outfielder to watch and see hit, but like many on the Nats roster, he's stamped with the "if healthy" label. So far in the brief history of the Washington Nationals, only Chad Cordero and Ryan Zimmerman have shown they belong in the category of proven game players, everyone else, without exception, is in the "if" category.

For the most part, I've kept out of, with an occasional incursion back in, on the Church Snelling debate. On field performances aside, one thing I've noticed that stands out about the two players is I/WE factor... When Snelling speaks, it's always "WE", and on the occasion he uses the term "I", it's always in relation the team, but when Church speaks, it's always "I", and that to me, speaks volumes.

[spidernat]

Snelling throwing a guy out, game winning walk.  Big HR last week. Can I call him a gamer?

Classic post Dave B....

I agree 100% with that statement, but often times fans forget, that using past numbers, especially from a relatively small sample, for any player, and one who's yet to prove his worth on a day-to-day basis, means absolutely nothing.

Yes, Church has had flashes of brilliance, but so have countless others before him who's names no one remembers. Yes, Snelling, when healthy is an exciting outfielder to watch and see hit, but like many on the Nats roster, he's stamped with the "if healthy" label. So far in the brief history of the Washington Nationals, only Chad Cordero and Ryan Zimmerman have shown they belong in the category of proven game players, everyone else, without exception, is in the "if" category.

For the most part, I've kept out of, with an occasional incursion back in, on the Church Snelling debate. On field performances aside, one thing I've noticed that stands out about the two players is I/WE factor... When Snelling speaks, it's always "WE", and on the occasion he uses the term "I", it's always in relation the team, but when Church speaks, it's always "I", and that to me, speaks volumes.

Had not noticed that Ken...

[Nat of the Living Dead]

I agree 100% with that statement, but often times fans forget, that using past numbers, especially from a relatively small sample, for any player, and one who's yet to prove his worth on a day-to-day basis, means absolutely nothing.

Yes, Church has had flashes of brilliance, but so have countless others before him who's names no one remembers. Yes, Snelling, when healthy is an exciting outfielder to watch and see hit, but like many on the Nats roster, he's stamped with the "if healthy" label. So far in the brief history of the Washington Nationals, only Chad Cordero and Ryan Zimmerman have shown they belong in the category of proven game players, everyone else, without exception, is in the "if" category.

For the most part, I've kept out of, with an occasional incursion back in, on the Church Snelling debate. On field performances aside, one thing I've noticed that stands out about the two players is I/WE factor... When Snelling speaks, it's always "WE", and on the occasion he uses the term "I", it's always in relation the team, but when Church speaks, it's always "I", and that to me, speaks volumes.

You know, I've also noticed that Church ties his own cleats and doesn't help out and offer to tie the other player's cleats as well......

I know where your trying to go with that but big deal.  This is Spring Training.  These guys are trying to WIN A JOB.  Minus Patterson, Cordero, Zimmerman, and Schneider, everyone of these guys is trying to win a job and 1up the other.  I tend to remember a Princess named Soriano who was all about the "I" and no one said anything about his lack of "we."

Some Washington National fans need to stop trying to smear WASHINGTON NATIONAL players at every chance they get over every little thing they can think of and start rooting for the team and the players on that team.  Oops, I heard Dimitri Young just ripped a juicy fart in the clubhouse.  Uh oh, that means Lee should be the first baseman because we all know that TRUE Major Leaguers just don't fart. 

Manny Acta and JimBo will put the best guy out there possible, I have no doubt about that and while I would love to see Church out there, I will happily go with whatever decision the team makes.

[Senators2005]

Oops, I heard Dimitri Young just ripped a juicy fart in the clubhouse.  Uh oh, that means Lee should be the first baseman because we all know that TRUE Major Leaguers just don't fart.

[shoeshineboy]

I've noticed the I/We thing as well, but there is an easy explanation. Snelling is the "backup" and playing well, so when asked questions about starting, the pat response is to say, "I'll do anything to help the team win." Church is the "starter" and struggling getting results at the plate. So when asked questions about his troubles, the clear response is to say, "I need to do better/I need to take it into the games/I want to see results." If the situations were reversed, the quotes would probably be too. It is a matter of context.

Still, as much as I root for Church and believe in his abilities, I can't take anything away from Snelling. He plays every play hard. He and Fick are gamers, and I am glad to see them on our team.

[spidernat]

You know, I've also noticed that Church ties his own cleats and doesn't help out and offer to tie the other player's cleats as well......

I know where your trying to go with that but big deal.  This is Spring Training.  These guys are trying to WIN A JOB.  Minus Patterson, Cordero, Zimmerman, and Schneider, everyone of these guys is trying to win a job and 1up the other.  I tend to remember a Princess named Soriano who was all about the "I" and no one said anything about his lack of "we."Some Washington National fans need to stop trying to smear WASHINGTON NATIONAL players at every chance they get over every little thing they can think of and start rooting for the team and the players on that team.  Oops, I heard Dimitri Young just ripped a juicy fart in the clubhouse.  Uh oh, that means Lee should be the first baseman because we all know that TRUE Major Leaguers just don't fart. 

Manny Acta and JimBo will put the best guy out there possible, I have no doubt about that and while I would love to see Church out there, I will happily go with whatever decision the team makes.

Where was that attitude when you were ripping Soriano (while he was in a Nationals' uniform) all last year?

[Nat of the Living Dead]

Where was that attitude when you were ripping Soriano (while he was in a Nationals' uniform) all last year?

Well when it came to character (which we are talking here) I pretty much pegged Soriano right on the dot.  I always said he was a wolf in sheep's clothing and would jump ship first chance he got and guess what?  He did.  End of discussion.  He had no intention of staying in DC but some naive fans let his lies and stats poison their judgement.

Church on the other hand, by DC media and fans has been called every negative term under the sun and yet, he is still here fighting for this team. He could've asked to be sent elsewhere for all the grief people like you give him but he hasn't.  To me, that says a lot more than $136 million dollars and "I's" and "we's."

[Dave B]

You know, I've also noticed that Church ties his own cleats and doesn't help out and offer to tie the other player's cleats as well......

Ridiculous analogy

Well when it came to character (which we are talking here) I pretty much pegged Soriano right on the dot.  I always said he was a wolf in sheep's clothing and would jump ship first chance he got and guess what?  He did.  End of discussion.  He had no intention of staying in DC but some naive fans let his lies and stats poison their judgement.

Church on the other hand, by DC media and fans has been called every negative term under the sun and yet, he is still here fighting for this team. He could've asked to be sent elsewhere for all the grief people like you give him but he hasn't.  To me, that says a lot more than $136 million dollars and "I's" and "we's."

"Wolf in sheeps clothing" is not accurate. Did he leave us any worse off than when he got here? I dont think so. So that is not the end of the discussion.

We will never know if he had any intention of staying in DC. The Nats couldnt even come close to the Cubs offer. 

Basically what Soriano did was what any MLB player would have done. Say the right things, and take the best offer

Church could not ask to be sent elsewhere unless he wants to cut off his nose to spite his face.  Is he going to demand a trade and force the Nats to trade him for peanuts? Is he going hold out?  So I'm not going to give him credit for being quiet.

Players who hit 46 HRs can take certain liberties.

It wasnt just some Nats fans who got all excited when Soriano stayed,  the players gave him an ovation in the locker room after the deadline passed, chanted his name, put him in a throne type thing, and gave him some high end tequilla (which I would assume is Patron, but maybe there is a whole other level of tequila out there) if my memory of an article serves me right.  And I'm pretty sure none of the players begrudge him for leaving.  Unlike you for some reason.  Its baseball, its business, someone else is bound to scar this badly again.

By most accounts people in the locker room loved him and he was the hardest worker on the team.  If a guy like that cant cash in for 136 mil, who can?

But I guess he was supposed to take 50-60 mil less to stay with the nats

[tomterp]

Church is 3 for 5 tonight including a 3-run homer and 5 RBI's.