Bay Area CF Debate

[shortsavage]

Who is more valuable to their team: Mark Kotsay or Marquis Grissom (not in fantasy terms)?

One of my peers is convinced that Kotsay is, but I do not think that it is even close.

[LBJackal]

Grissom seems to be the better hitter (OPS wise, at least) and I don't know much about their defense, but I've always heard Grissom is pretty good. Although it's a terrible way to judge defense, I'll say Grissom and his 0 errors are better than Kotsay and his 4 errors. I'm too lazy to look up range factors

[shortsavage]

Kotsay probably has a better range factor.

However, I do not think it is good enough to make him as valuable as Marquis.

Kotsay's other asset is his ability to get on base (both through hits and walks), yet Grissom has more runs.

Are there any pro Kotsay arguements?

[shortsavage]

Hehe, is this just an undebatable topic?

[SaintsOfTheDiamond]

I don't really follow either team that closely, but I would go with Grissom just because of his run production etc.

[JuiceMonkey]

Grissom has def proven himself to be more valuable for a longer time while Kotsay has just sat ont he bench and is finally showing some of the talent he displayed in college. I think Grissom's batting position in front of Bonds speaks to his value... he gets on so Bonds can drive him in, if he gets a pitch.

As far as debatable... I dont think anyone cares about Bay Area teams unless its to talk s--t about Bonds or Zito.