Garret Anderson To Retire

Garret Anderson is retiring today, according to MLB.com's Lyle Spencer. The 17-year veteran posted a .293/.324/.461 in 17 seasons with the Angels, Braves and Dodgers, but he'll be remembered for his contributions in Anaheim. He retires as the Angels' all-time leader in games, hits, doubles, total bases, runs, extra base hits and RBI.

The 1990 fourth-round selection made three All-Star teams and won two Silver Sluggers. He was especially productive in 2002, when the Angels won it all, and 2003. Anderson led the American League in doubles both years, posting a combined OPS+ of 129.

Anderson agreed to a minor league deal with the Dodgers last March, but they cut him in August after a disappointing season. The 38-year-old hit .181/.204/.271 for the Dodgers and didn't draw interest as a free agent this winter.


140 Responses to Garret Anderson To Retire Leave a Reply

  1. Goldberg365 4 years ago

    Good, I hated him when he was on the Braves.

    • seligeramus 4 years ago

      Is that necessary? Mediocre performance in Atlanta aside, I’m not sure rejoicing in his retirement is warranted. I never heard anything but good things about his clubhouse presence, and he was certainly a force for a few years in his career. It seems tactless to hate a guy and be happy about his retirement because of a pit-stop he made at the tail end of his otherwise good career.

      • Goldberg365 4 years ago

        For the year of pain and suffering he gave me, yes, yes it is. He acted like he did not want to be in the field and loafed around with no passion. That doesn’t scream class act to me. But to each his own.

        • PushDown 4 years ago

          Yeah, and disrespecting someone and telling him good riddance “scream class act.”

          • coolstorybro222 4 years ago

            Oh look it’s a Angels fan defending his medicore player.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            perfectly-correctly-rated mediocre player*

          • PushDown 4 years ago

            Oh shoot I guess I got the definition of fan wrong, should I be disrespecting the team and players I root for?

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            Actually you and some others look more like people ripping on a player you know absolutely nothing about.

        • ryankrol 4 years ago

          A year of pain and suffering? haha That’s probably because he was getting old and should have been DHing. His legs had been declining since about 2004. There was a time in the late 90s when this guy, along with Salmon and Edmonds, would run down just about every line drive that would dare make it’s way into the left center field gap. Then, of course there is his bat, which (as far as I know) led the Majors in Hits from 1995-2003; might have to check that, but it’s around that vicinity. But, seriously, what were you really expecting out of Garrett Anderson when he was 37? lol

    • Yo Goldberg365. At least Anderson could stay healthy and play unlike that piece of crap Chipper Jones. Garrett Anderson is a hall of famer you dumbass. Braves are going to suck this year anyways. Your pitching staff consist of a bunch of old men. Good luck with Phillies dumbass.

  2. notsureifsrs 4 years ago

    no hard feelings, but definitely one of the most overrated players in recent history

    • Over rated by who? He was largely ignored his entire career.

      • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

        Career to date (may be incomplete) $76,523,000

        if only we could all be so ignored

        • ignored by the media =/= ignored by the team paying him

          You may have meant the latter, but its not like you specified.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            “here is evidence that he wasn’t overrated by everyone. this should disprove the claim that he was overrated”

        • PushDown 4 years ago

          And that means he was overrated…?

          Plus, dude leads the Angels in several important offensive categories, he ain’t a chump.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            “And that means he was overrated…?”

            …yep. he was a below average major league player for 9 of his 16 seasons, less than a win above average for another 5. two good seasons in 16

          • PushDown 4 years ago

            Yeah, but he can’t be overrated if nobody paid him much attention.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            why’s that?

            i enjoy the fact that several people in this thread are overrating him while others of you insist it isn’t so

            it was also good when someone cited a lack of espn coverage. because in order to be overrated, espn has to think you’re a top player in the game. if people widely believe that you were/are a pretty good player despite the fact that you very definitely were not, that’s not being overrated. we don’t know what it is, but we’re very sure it’s not being overrated

          • Taylor Hope 4 years ago

            If you were fans of a team in the AL West you would know that the numbers he put up offensively do not signify how big of a threat he was, and his defensive statistics… well I wouldn’t call him a great fielder, but he wasn’t that poor of a player.

        • Commander_Nate 4 years ago

          By today’s estimation of WAR/$, he was worth around $126 million over his career. He didn’t reach 10-figures until he turned 36, and was making barely $5 mil when he was having MVP-caliber seasons.

          • Commander_Nate 4 years ago

            *8-figures

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            “By today’s estimation of WAR/$”

            why in the world would you use that

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            also 0 MVP-caliber seasons

          • Commander_Nate 4 years ago

            2002 – finished 4th in voting. 2003 – finished 14th in voting. Combined WAR: 11.4.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            ^check out my switch to rWAR to skirt the defense issue. TZ is less precise but nevermind you that it works for my argument

            8.6 fWAR from 02-03 – peak WAR 5.0. about 30 players put up 5+ WAR last season

            as for the voting: srs? that evidence is the property of the he-was-overrated beaureu

          • Good lord you’re pretentious

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            i also lack class and tact. all dignified and unpretentious things to point out

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            You’re digging your own grave. lol

            An MVP is measured by the value the player is to his ballclub; the point being what that team would do without said player.

            Kirk Gibson won the NL MVP Award in 1988 with only 25 HR and 76 RBI, because he brought a fire to the team that stayed lit even when he went down in the World Series.

            Don’t give up though. I have hope for you. haha

          • Brad426 4 years ago

            Yeah, you’re really burying him.

          • strikethree 4 years ago

            By what system?

            Today’s “estimation of WAR/$” is just that — an estimation. It should only be used for quick generalizations (and are usually quite inaccurate at that).

            Anyhow, today’s rate throws in inflation and the estimated “current market price” for the current period. Market prices back then were not as high as they are now.

            Plus, let’s not forget that he played for 17 seasons. (16 is you subtracted his first season since he was just given 13 abs and 15 seasons if you wanted to take away his last year) That leads to about 1.6-1.8 WAR a season. That’s not great especially for a corner OFer. He finished with a 102 OPS+ which is practically the definition of “average”. (Although, a bit worse since he was a corner OFer)

        • You can’t include regular people in an argument about which baseball players have been ignored, let alone make your case using financials. Compare him with other professional players, and he’s one of the most unknown 2,500 hit guys out there.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            many of you are equating “overrated” with “widely popular”. this is your choice, but not something indicated by the word itself

            anderson’s career is a great illustration of why counting stats like career hits should be giving very little weight

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            “anderson’s career is a great illustration of why counting stats like career hits should be giving very little weight”

            Do you even know how Runs are scored in the game of baseball?

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            by benching garret anderson

            seriously tho that is such a perfectly ironic comment. do you know what mister anderson’s adjusted batted runs total is for his career? 7. SEVEN. for his career

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            That stat is meaningless. Keep trying. Maybe someday you’ll learn how the game is actually determined.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            i will wait for your explanation of what exactly the statistic tells you and why it is meaningless. if your next comment does not contain that explanation, i will understand you to be admitting you don’t know the answer and you’re sorry for pretending otherwise just so you could seem to have a leg-up in an argument on the internet

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            Hahaha! You need to get a life, son.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            i accept your apology

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            You’re right. I’m sorry for arguing with a person such as yourself that has such a major mental flaw of using sabermetrics to empower yourself in order to compensate for having a low IQ. You’re really a sad addition to this site, or anything involving the game of baseball.

      • ryankrol 4 years ago

        MLB would laugh at this guy. lol

      • ryankrol 4 years ago

        Overrated by people who use sabermetrics to empower themselves in order to compensate for their lack of intelligence.

    • Commander_Nate 4 years ago

      Yeah, all that airtime he got on ESPN was really overblown…

      • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

        that sentence doesn’t mean what you think it means

        • Commander_Nate 4 years ago

          Sarcasm detector – $25 at Wal Mart.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            overblown adjective Of exaggerated importance; too heavily emphasized, hyped, etc

            0 for 2 keep hackin

          • Commander_Nate 4 years ago

            “…exaggerated importance” meaning that the massive amount of coverage he recieved on ESPN (or other media) was unwarranted. The sarcasm works because he rarely recieved any media coverage, even when he was having really good years.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            “the airtime he got on ESPN was of exaggerated importance/too heavily emphasized”

            what

            the joke was that he wasn’t on ESPN, so the sentence [fragment] would read “yeah all that airtime he got on ESPN…” …because he didn’t get any. get it! to say that the airtime was of exaggerated importance…doesn’t even really mean anything at all actually

            seriously how badly do we need opening day right now

          • Commander_Nate 4 years ago

            Nope, it makes sense. You know what I’m talking about, the way ESPN overdoes everything for certain players (you and others mention Jeter in this thread for example). To this day, hardly a day goes by without some mention of what’s going on with Jeter, whether it’s about baseball or what he had for breakfast. Anderson never had that kind of treatment, even when he was putting up good numbers. How the media portrays things is part of our reality.

            I’m not saying the guy belongs in the HOF, but you and I seem to have different definitions of “overrated” when it comes to how players are portrayed by the media and fans. In my view, Anderson was underrated in the media through the prime of his career.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            i guess i don’t watch enough espn

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            LOL You actually sound like you don’t watch anything at all and just determine the game on paper. It’s okay though. I encourage people to use their imagination once in a while.

          • Brad426 4 years ago

            Can you send me a link? I don’t see them on the web-site.

            Also, if they were really at Wal-Mart they would be like $24.96.

          • Are these legit?

          • Commander_Nate 4 years ago

            So far I’ve only been able to get it to make toast, but I’ll let you know.

            (Hope this posted in the right spot this time…)

    • 76,523,000 / 17 is 4.5 million per year.

      The guy leads an entire franchise in games, hits, doubles, total bases, runs, extra base hits, and RBI while winning a World Series and netting 2,500 hits.

      How exactly does that make him overrated?

      • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

        counting stats? cool story. he’s a perfect example of the fact that you can play mediocre ball for quite a long time and – surprise – have high totals

        .293/.324/.461 wOBA .333 wRC+ 99 check me out fellas. and give me some glory for that world series because i am a postseason stud

        .245/.266/.395 wOBA .281 wRC+ 68

        BAM!

        • ryankrol 4 years ago

          All your little averages don’t prove anything other than some tendencies in Garrett Anderson as well as yourself.

          MLB only cares about one thing, and one thing only: PRODUCTION!

          Any team would love to have a player who averages 99 RBI’s every 162 games regardless of his OBP.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            i so enjoy getting someone to finally admit that they don’t actually understand statistical analysis, they just use the stats they’ve heard of whenever it’s convenient

            you’ve heard lots about RBI and know what it stands for, so it is right and important and good. instead of taking the opportunity to expand on that understanding and learn more about the game that you love, you’ll banish any advanced statistic that doesn’t perfectly align with your preconceptions. brilliant

            i think you’ve done more here to discredit your own case than i could hope to in 10 more comments. for this i thank you

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            I never admitted anything. I understand statistical analysis, probably more than you do. Saying you “enjoy” getting someone to admit something they never admitted is a clear indication that you are just a stats nerd who one day discovered the use of sabermetrics in baseball, and then when you got that look in your eyes you probably thought that made you an expert. By spitting out everything BUT Run Production, you discredited your own argument the moment you even thought of it. RUN PRODUCTION is all MLB cares about.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            “i know you are but what am i”, that it?

            about this run production thing. what is your understanding of BtRuns (Adjusted Batting Runs)? 7.4 is garret anderson’s career total in that department

            what is your understanding of RC (runs created)? anderson’s career RC+ is 99, which is a tick below league average

            can you provide one useful measure of an individual’s performance that suggests that garret anderson was a very productive hitter over his career?

            make your answer is long as you like. my *fanboy talking about advanced statistics as if he knows how they work and is so over them* bingo card is almost full!

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            LOL I just provided several useful measures. The boys on MLB Network just refuted everything you’re reaching for. I’ll believe former players who have actually been there and played with GA than some stats nerd who actually has the audacity to try and refute the 17 year career of a great player. Keep trying though. You might learn about the game someday. =-)

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            i wonder why you ignored the questions. it couldn’t be that you don’t know what those statistics reflect, could it? i ask again:

            what is your understanding of BtRuns (Adjusted Batting Runs)? 7.4 is garret anderson’s career total in that department

            what is your understanding of RC (runs created)? anderson’s career RC+ is 99, which is a tick below league average?

            what is the meaning of these statistics and why are they misleading? i will tell you right now that if you can explain this to me, i will agree with you that garret anderson was a very good player. but if your next comment does not contain an explanation, i will understand you to be admitting you don’t know the answer and you’re sorry for pretending otherwise just so you could seem to have a leg-up in an argument on the internet

            personally, i love baseball and furthering my understanding of it through advanced statistics has been very rewarding, despite the fact that many of the things i used to believe (and players i used to love) about the game have been proven wrong along the way. it isn’t much a bother, though, as my overall appreciation of the difficulty of the game and the talent of those who play it well has increased enormously

            cool story, right? anyway i have no idea why you’d consider it more important to appear right about something than to understand it. but hey, good luck with that

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            You are clearly brainwashed and can’t think for yourself.

      • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

        also pretty disingenuous to count the first 7 “seasons” during which he made 7 million under team control

        after that, he made almost $70m for ~13 WAR

        • Commander_Nate 4 years ago

          And the Yankees are paying Jeter how much now? Players get paid on past performance. That may not be the best way to do things, but it’s how it’s done.

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            And GA would be right there with Jeter numbers-wise if he had not missed so much time from 2004-2010.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            jeter is enormously overrated, therefore garret anderson was not? is that the argument now?

          • Commander_Nate 4 years ago

            No, I’m pointing out the obvious about both of their salaries. I replied to the Jeter-Anderson idea above.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            to clarify, player’s get paid based on expected future performance, which it turn is based largely on past performance. anderson was not worth his salary in either direction, tho

            i think i was pretty clear from the beginning that i don’t have anything against the guy. i don’t have any good idea of how often he was or wasn’t on television shows or in sports illustrated and i don’t really care

            he wasn’t nearly as good as most people (even in this thread) say he was and he wasn’t worth nearly what he was paid

            that doesn’t mean angels fans can’t or shouldn’t like him. it just means there’s no statistical argument available to defend his infinite honor

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            Most players, managers, GMs in MLB would laugh at you.

    • ryankrol 4 years ago

      I’m not usually quick to point out RBI’s, but the guy’s 162 game average is 99.

      It was right at 100 when he left the Angels.

      Don’t be fooled by his 75-96 RBI range from 2004-2008, he actually averaged 106 during that time.

      Like I said, RBI’s are not the best stat to use, but in this case it works because Garrett Anderson played on quite a few weak offensive teams in his time, and yet that somehow didn’t stop him from being very productive.

      Then, there’s a stat that I need to double check, but I believe he led the Majors in Hits from 1995-2003. Derek who?

      Speaking of Jeter, I can almost guarantee you that if Garrett Anderson had not missed so much time from 2004-2010, he might have approached 3,000 Hits, if not surpassed that.

      Btw, this whole myth about Garrett Anderson being lazy is a bunch of ….. There was a time when GA used to run down almost every gapper that dared make it’s way into the Angels OF, meaning he didn’t really have to dive because he was fast and knew how to track a fly ball, and also always Edmonds or Erstad there to cover left center anyways. His legs were declining since 2004, and he should have been DHing a lot more than he was.

      There is a LOT of info available to back up Garrett Anderson’s success.

      • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

        “There is a LOT of info available to back up Garrett Anderson’s success. ”

        so far i have RBIs, for which the rest of his teams are largely responsible. i mean you say they were weak offensive clubs – is that supposed to mean they weren’t actually on base when he hit them in? i don’t get it. if they were, he doesn’t get extra credit

        do you mean he hit extra well with RISP? because he pretty much didn’t. career wOBA: .336. three point bump

        so RBIs. what else? i see exactly 2 good seasons in 16 years

        • ryankrol 4 years ago

          Go back and look at the remaining 50% of my comment that you so conveniently ignored. lol

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            i didn’t think i was supposed to take the rest seriously

            …hits? he was a contact hitter without much power who refused to take a walk. his career OBP is below league average. his wOBA is .333. he was a very mediocre hitter who played for a long time

            he was a solid defender for the first half of his career, but because he had so little power and couldn’t get on base, his overall value wasn’t much save for two years out of 16

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            Actually, you were afraid to argue against the rest because you know it refutes your argument by a couple of touchdowns.

            You can sit there and try to sell your little averages as knowledge all you want to, but the fact remains that Hits, Doubles, Homeruns, RBIs, and Runs — all of which GA consistently produced — all equal the one thing that MLB only cares about in the end: PRODUCTION!

            Any player who can manage averaging 99 RBI every 162 with only an average of 21 HR is probably a good !@#$ing clutch hitter.

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            the fact remains that Hits, Doubles, Homeruns, RBIs, and Runs — all of which GA consistently produced — all equal the one thing that MLB only cares about in the end: PRODUCTION!

            do you know why this is funny for other people? because my “little average” (wOBA) not only accounts for all those hits, but it weights them properly. it reflects the quality, not just the fact that a hit happened. surely you don’t think all hits are of equal value? a single is as valuable as a home run?

            so among other things, wOBA adjusts for the differences in the value of these hits (and of walks). it gives you a much clearer picture of how a hitter contributed – of what he PRODUCED – than batting average or hits or RBI or runs or any counting stat you can think of

            and what does wOBA tell us? at .333 garret anderson just wasn’t a very good hitter. the end

            and there are other ways to corroborate this. linear weights are delightful and illuminating. but why learn about this stuff if it is only going to burst your delusion bubbles, eh? garret anderson was great and derek jeter is GOLD GLOVER DAMN IT. oo-rah!

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            Wrong again, nerd.

          • TigersAndBraves 4 years ago

            Thank God. We have sanity back in baseball.

            All you little WAR and wOBA people, there’s a reason that production has been measured in avg, RBI, HR, ERA, etc. for the last 80 years.

        • ARod's Ring 4 years ago

          please grab a bat, go to a batting cage and try to hit at 90MPH…

          • notsureifsrs 4 years ago

            yea what i meant was that he is overrated compared to the average person who doesn’t play baseball

            you showed me

          • ryankrol 4 years ago

            Actually you were proven wrong a long time ago. But we expect trolls like you to try and infiltrate these threads, so whatever. =-)

      • start_wearing_purple 4 years ago

        I looked up your stat. You were correct, Anderson lead the league in hits from 1995-2003, so sayeth fangraphs. I admit I was a little surprised.

        I’m not going to get into the whole overrated/underrated argument too deeply because ultimately it’s going to be in the eye of the beholder. However I will say this: I know a lot of people consider this guy to be an elite player, that I completely disagree with. For a guy who spent a large amount of his career in left to end with a 102 OPS+ is amazingly low for anything to be considered “elite”. Overall, I personally believe the guy to be a slightly above average player, little more.

        • ryankrol 4 years ago

          Leading the Majors in Hits from 1995-2003 should count for a lot. I mean, how do you score Runs again?

          In 17 seasons, GA averaged 99 RBI, 38 Doubles, 79 Runs.

          A player’s status is not solely determined by his OPS+.

          MLB only cares about one thing: Production.

    • $7562574 4 years ago

      if you revive babe ruth now he will be the worst player in his 100’s.

  3. NathanielS 4 years ago

    I respected the hell out of him, class act.

  4. blurnandez 4 years ago

    Solid career.

    Good luck in retirement, Garret!

  5. Commander_Nate 4 years ago

    Farewell and good luck, GA. Dude was the Angels to me growing up in the 90’s along with Tim Salmon and a few others. Game 7, 2002 “Anderson clears the bases!” I’ll always remember that.

    Man, I’m starting to get old.

    • I can literally feel you getting old right now.

    • NathanielS 4 years ago

      I had the same thought, other Nate. I’ve been following this dude since I was 13, now he retired! I still have thirty/fourty years.

  6. Jeff 4 years ago

    Class act, but the definition of overpaid replacement player. His role will now be taken over by Jeff Franceour.

    • ryankrol 4 years ago

      LOL How is that exactly? It’s clear that you and a few others know absolutely nothing Garrett Anderson.

  7. Should have hung em up a while back.

  8. PushDown 4 years ago

    Definitely wished he had ended his career with the Halos.

  9. Gumby65 4 years ago

    If I’m not mistaken, the last California Angel to hang em up?

  10. Commander_Nate 4 years ago

    So far, I’ve only been able to get it to make toast, but I’ll let you know.

  11. Commander_Nate 4 years ago

    So far, I’ve only been able to get it to make toast, but I’ll let you know.

  12. Guest 4 years ago

    Yeah last year was so much fun!

  13. give m a one day contract Reagins!

  14. He had a good career for the Angels, I wish him the best.

  15. BlueSkyLA 4 years ago

    Can you feel the love yet, Garret?

  16. Guest 4 years ago

    Comments being deleted??. GIT SOME!!

  17. ryankrol 4 years ago

    I just watched the boys on MLB Network giving Garrett Anderson nothing but love. The words “great player” must have come out of their mouths about 20 times.

    Fact check: From 1995-2003, GA led the Majors in both Hits AND Doubles.

  18. Unless you’re a lifetime Angel fan like myself and others on this thread, you’re free to drink the haterade, he wasn’t your franchise leader, that’s fine.

    As for myself, I’ll always remember 2002, the 10 RBI game vs the Yankees, the 2003 Home Run Derby and silver slugger, and the Angels all-time leader in games, hits, RBI, doubles, runs, extra base hits, and total bases.

    I’m grateful to have grown up watching this guy play ball for my team and it’s sad that the outfield I grew up rooting for is now entirely retired.

  19. darkhoarse820 4 years ago

    I told a friend (an Angels fan) yesterday that I felt sorry for him BECAUSE he was on the Dodgers last year. He clearly didn’t have his stuff anymore and you can trace that back to his last year with Anaheim. He did poorly then, he did even worse in Atlanta and he just plain suffered here in Los Angeles last year. The fans hated him and it would remind me of the scene with Darryl Strawberry crying in the Simpsons episode, where the fans just booed him to death. Yes, he went out on a sour note, but you cannot knock him for that after fifteen years of legendary performance. I hate the Angels, but he stood out as someone to watch, regardless of what I like and don’t like. Dodger fans should be ashamed they treated him the way I saw them treat him.

    • BlueSkyLA 4 years ago

      Once upon a time, fans almost never booed anyone on their own team (except in Philly). I’ve always disliked that kind of fan behavior and so I’m dismayed that it’s caught on around the leagues and a little ashamed that any fan frustration was directed at Anderson. I felt sorry for Anderson and although he was obviously doing nothing for the team or himself, anybody who cared to knew he was once a fine player. Nobody with any ounce of soul wants to see someone like him come to such an ignominious end.

  20. Israel Piedra 4 years ago

    Very good, not great, player who probably overperformed his talent level. His numbers were approaching HOF marks.

    • ryankrol 4 years ago

      Any player who can average 99 RBI against just an average of 21 HR, while only having a career .324 OBP is a great clutch hitter.

  21. murmor 4 years ago

    As a Braves fan I was excited that they picked GA up as a free agent.
    He had an extremly dissapointing year but I do not think it was because
    he did not care like some Braves fans stated. GA had a very good career
    and if he had years for the Braves like he did with the Angels he would
    be a beloved player with Braves fans just like he is now with Angels fan.

  22. Goldberg365 4 years ago

    That we want our ballplayers to run out hits? To at least try and field a dying quail? To act like they want to be a player for our team instead of collecting a paycheck? Anderson did none of these and played the entire season with a look of sadness and disregard for anything going in the field.

    He had a good career, thats fantastic for him, but I’m glad that he is gone so the memory of his lackadaisical play can slip from my memory. I’m sure Angels fans feel differently, thats good for them, however I am entitled to my opinion as well.

  23. ryankrol 4 years ago

    Apparently you don’t listen.

  24. $7562574 4 years ago

    is it his fault that he was old? or it was your team’s g.m.’s fault that he/she signed an aging outfielder to play defense in that hell hole you call the baseball park? all that muggy air, humidity and the smog would prevent anyone from playing defense.

  25. ryankrol 4 years ago

    I did watch him play him with the Braves, I’ve been watching Atlanta since 1991.

    Key term: Age 37!!!

  26. It only seemed like it was careless, but if you ask anyone on the team, no one worked harder

  27. ryankrol 4 years ago

    Key term: Age 37!

  28. ryankrol 4 years ago

    Here come the trolls to trash one of the best players of the past 20 years.

  29. ryankrol 4 years ago

    Key phrase: “Bust their asses and fail.”

    Players who are stubborn and foolish bust their asses at 37 and fail.

    Players who know their limitations and bring a decent amount of production for their age are the aging veterans teams want, even if they have to sit on the bench.

    Players can bust their ass all they want to when they are 27. It’s not such a good idea at age 37.

    MLB only cares about production.

  30. ryankrol 4 years ago

    So you would rather see GA go beyond his physical limits, fail, and create a gaping hole in LF, than have him know his limitations and allow himself to provide at least some decent run production for his age to help keep your team afloat at 86 wins?

  31. ryankrol 4 years ago

    Actually it isn’t. The game of baseball is won by scoring Runs. And those Runs are scored by players getting on base and being DRIVEN IN, or sometimes on mistakes made by the defenders on the field.

    1993 Ruben Sierra drove in 101 RBI and scored 77 Runs, which accounted for 24.8% of the Runs scored by the A’s that season.

    Run production.

  32. ryankrol 4 years ago

    Learn about the game.

  33. ryankrol 4 years ago

    fWAR this UZR that, it’s all flawed!

    Your GM trading Mark Teixeira and Tim Hudson’s arm injury are what cost you the season!

    Pointing the finger at a 37 year old Garrett Anderson is a sign of desperation on your part.

  34. notsureifsrs 4 years ago

    any fact that does not support my preferred conclusion is false by default. that is how truth works

  35. ryankrol 4 years ago

    They had a few players that performed decently, and Sierra was one of them. Maybe if Mark McGwire was healthy, and if their GM had replaced Harold Baines at DH, Sierra might have had some protection. But 101 RBI is pretty good when losing 2 big bats, and not having much protection left around him. Those slash lines only tell you what a player’s tendencies are. They do not define a player.

  36. Taylor Hope 4 years ago

    I would take .233/.288/.390 for 101 RBIs in a season. If you punch in the runs, you win the game and that’s all there is to it.

  37. Brad426 4 years ago

    He didn’t say it cost the Braves the season, he said Anderson cost them “almost an entire run”. Your defense of him is admirable, but as a Brave he (as others have voiced) was a real letdown. And it wasn’t because of the fact that he was 37, it was because he didn’t give much of an effort.

    I understand players age and they aren’t as good… Chipper Jones is a case in point. His body just doesn’t let him do the stuff he could do when he was younger, but he still give maximum effort all the time (and gets hurt a lot). Nobody expects Chipper to be as good as he was 10 years ago, but they do still expect the effort.

    If Chipper were to end his career with the Angels and give you a half-hearted effort, I wouldn’t expect you to love him. And in fairness, I would probably be irked if you dogged him after all he’s done for MY organization, but I would understand.

  38. ryankrol 4 years ago

    So in other words you admit you lost the argument.

  39. ryankrol 4 years ago

    Being a troll is no way to live, son.

  40. ryankrol 4 years ago

    HAHA! MANY would agree with me. Neither one of you have a clue how the game functions. Try discrediting Garrett Anderson with the players who played with him, and I’m sure you’ll be laughed at. But hey, maybe it’s a lesson you need to learn. Learn about “The Great Game.”

  41. ryankrol 4 years ago

    I recommend the Baseball Handbook.

  42. ryankrol 4 years ago

    Bad analogy. MLB still uses the basic stats on a practical level just as much as they did 80 years ago. If you need sabermetrics to tell you that Lou Gehrig was a great hitter then no wonder. LOL

  43. Taylor Hope 4 years ago

    Sort of like my above comment, I would take a player who is below average at reaching base if I can at least get run production from him. Sure, a player like Sierra would be frustrating to have, but it’s hard to argue with 101 RBIs. You surely can’t say you’d prefer .265 and 50 RBIs over that.

  44. ryankrol 4 years ago

    As with many other condescending stats nerds, you use slash lines in a general manner — and you actually think that helps you define a player.

    That is a clear indication of you either being ignorant or just having a low baseball IQ.

    Any player who can manage 101 RBI with only a .288 OBP is a d@!n good clutch hitter.

    Learn anything yet?

    Or are you still brainwashed by your discovery of sabermetrics and can’t think for yourself?

  45. ryankrol 4 years ago

    No, your GM trading Mark Teixeira and the injury of Tim Hudson was the let down.

    Comparing Chipper, a third baseman, to an outfielder is a horrible example.

    Btw, has Chipper ever had arthritis? GA did.

    Since when does every player age at the same rate?

    After all, GA is retiring right now while Chipper is still playing — they both were rookies the same season.

    But why al I even explaining all of this?

    I know for a fact that Garrett Anderson worked as hard as anyone to the last game.

    You obviously don’t know this.

    Anyone who tries to discredit GA in any way is going to be laughed at by those who were on the field, in the dugout, and in the front offices while Garrett Anderson was playing his great career. =-)

  46. ryankrol 4 years ago

    There are so many involved with MLB who would vouch for that to the day GA dies.

  47. ryankrol 4 years ago

    Learn how to think for yourself yet, kid?

  48. ryankrol 4 years ago

    Player 1

    2 runs were scored as a result of his RBI single and Run scored.

    You mentioned ZERO run production from player 2, which is all MLB cares about.

  49. Brad426 4 years ago

    Way to completely miss the point and blindly defend your idol. You argued stuff I didn’t even say. And I never tried to “discredit” Anderson… he had a fine career and Angels fans should be appreciative.

    However, he gave the Braves one year of half-hearted effort, and while you can say blah blah blah 37 blah blah blah arthritis blah blah all you want, it doesn’t matter… for whatever reason he dialed it in and you can’t expect Braves fans to have the same adoration for the guy as you do.

Leave a Reply