Posted by MikeT23 on 4/10/2015 1:13:00 PM (view original):
Not at all.  I'm suggesting he was the one constant, the face of the franchise that came back from dead to be the biggest thing going in baseball.    I agree that Joe D was the better player.   But that's not the poll.   It's "most impactful".   

As for Canseco, I'm almost positive he introduced 'roids to MLB.   If you don't think they had a huge impact on baseball, I'm not sure where to take this exchange.

Posted by dahsdebater on 4/10/2015 2:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/10/2015 1:13:00 PM (view original):
Not at all.  I'm suggesting he was the one constant, the face of the franchise that came back from dead to be the biggest thing going in baseball.    I agree that Joe D was the better player.   But that's not the poll.   It's "most impactful".   

As for Canseco, I'm almost positive he introduced 'roids to MLB.   If you don't think they had a huge impact on baseball, I'm not sure where to take this exchange.

The one constant other than Bernie Williams, Jorge Posada, Mariano, and Pettitte?

I mean, come on.  If you want to talk about impact on the game, or even the team, write in Rivera.  I can see that.  He changed the way the game was played, both in terms of the sport and the team.  Jeter's not the guy who turned the Yankees around.  That was the Boss.  I don't even think it's debatable.  They had a better record in '94, before Jeter showed up, than they did for his first 3 seasons, or all but a handful of the rest of them.  He joined a good team and, as far as winning% goes, he didn't really make it better.

I just want you to come clean here.  You didn't vote for Jeter for some bullshit reason based on the definition of the word "impact."  You voted for him because of your intense man-love for him, and maybe the "impact" he had on your personal relationship with the sport.  And then you picked the next 3 best guys, not thinking about "impact."

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/10/2015 1:28:00 PM (view original):
Jeter was the guy that the GMs could point to and say "George, give the kid a chance to develop under our coaches.   We know he's kicking balls all over the place in Tampa but he just needs some more work.   We don't have to trade him for Ken Phelps.   He'll be alright."

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/10/2015 2:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 4/10/2015 2:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/10/2015 1:13:00 PM (view original):
Not at all.  I'm suggesting he was the one constant, the face of the franchise that came back from dead to be the biggest thing going in baseball.    I agree that Joe D was the better player.   But that's not the poll.   It's "most impactful".   

As for Canseco, I'm almost positive he introduced 'roids to MLB.   If you don't think they had a huge impact on baseball, I'm not sure where to take this exchange.

The one constant other than Bernie Williams, Jorge Posada, Mariano, and Pettitte?

I mean, come on.  If you want to talk about impact on the game, or even the team, write in Rivera.  I can see that.  He changed the way the game was played, both in terms of the sport and the team.  Jeter's not the guy who turned the Yankees around.  That was the Boss.  I don't even think it's debatable.  They had a better record in '94, before Jeter showed up, than they did for his first 3 seasons, or all but a handful of the rest of them.  He joined a good team and, as far as winning% goes, he didn't really make it better.

I just want you to come clean here.  You didn't vote for Jeter for some bullshit reason based on the definition of the word "impact."  You voted for him because of your intense man-love for him, and maybe the "impact" he had on your personal relationship with the sport.  And then you picked the next 3 best guys, not thinking about "impact."

Was Williams, Posada and Pettite there the entire time?   I'd actually listen to Rivera arguments.

But I already explained George, prospects trades and whatnot a couple of posts ago.  I explained why Jeter was impactful in how the Yankees began doing business after so many failed seasons.   I'm assuming you responded before you read it.   If not, please do so now.

Posted by Got_Worms on 4/10/2015 2:08:00 PM (view original):
So who did you all vote for?  I'm curious to see how much consensus there is among each franchise Top Four.  I started the voting with my hometown Seattle Mariners:

Ken Griffey Jr
Edgar Martinez
Felix Hernandez
Jay Buhner

It was tough to leave Randy off that list but I don't like the way he left the franchise in 1998.  Ichiro was another option.  Maybe they need to do Top Five!

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/10/2015 2:29:00 PM (view original):
Let's be honest.   Your intense hatred of Jeter skews your view.    He was the face of the franchise that shitkicked your beloved Orioles for a couple of decades.   Either you don't understand the meaning of the word "impact", you can't admit what Jeter meant to the Yankees or you're simply a long-winded, raging dumbass.   Could be all three.

What Jeter "meant" to the Yankees?  The team or the fans?

You're a fan.  I get that he meant a lot to you.

He didn't mean that much to the team.  They would have won nearly as much without him.  It was a great team.  Odds are, somebody else would have stepped up to be the vocal clubhouse leader in his absence.  It's not like most clubhouses suffer from a lack of leadership.  Some do, certainly, but they are definitely the exception.  And it's not like Steinbrenner wouldn't have gone out and bought a shortstop if they hadn't developed one.  And in spite of your repeated assertions to the contrary, it's not like Jeter ushered in a golden era of internal development.  Jeter came up in 1995.  10 years later, the only other significant homegrown guys on the roster were Posada and Mariano, who were basically the same vintage as Jeter, Bernie, who predated Jeter, and Cano.  So in 10 years, Jeter's influence on the way the team was run led to exactly Cano?  And that's his significant impact on the team?  Get your head out of your ***.

Did you agree that Jackie Robinson was the #2 most impactful player in MLB history?

Do you think he's top 10 in talent?   Top 20?   Top 50? 

Do you understand how that contradicts your "valuations", dumbass?

Do you think a player has to be a future HOFer to be critical to a team's success?

Did BL take over your username?   Because it seems like you don't watch baseball.