Talk:Jimmy Rollins

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Improvements[edit]

I added statistical highlights for 2005 and integrated the trivia section into the article. Killervogel5 (talk) 16:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Rollins is a member of the 30-30 club which isn't listed under his Career Highlights and Awards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.117.112.138 (talk) 14:13, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's because it doesn't qualify to be listed in the infobox. It's listed later in the article. — KV5 • Talk • 00:53, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources[edit]

There's a ref tag that is a statement (not citing a reliable source), which simply says "His favorite number is 6, but used 7 instead when he was initally called up because Doug Glanville had 6. He switched from 7 to 11 when Kenny Lofton joined the Phillies, and stuck with the number. Ryan Howard currently wears number 6 for the Phillies."

Does anyone have a valid source to use for a reference on that? I'm removing it now, as a statement is not verifiable without providing a reliable source. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it's recorded out there anywhere, but I know 6 to 7 is correct because I heard Harry Kalas talk about it on television when Rollins was first called up full-time in 2001. I thought Lofton paid Rollins to change from 7 to 11. I will look for the source. Killervogel5 (talk) 21:48, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I sourced the new statements as correct. For the record, Rollins didn't wear 7 (my bad). He was wearing 11, then went back to 6 when it was available (I don't know if that's enough fact to say that he preferred or desired the number). He gave 6 up for the same player that left. Killervogel5 (talk) 22:53, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. My only thought is that it might be better to work that text (and sources) into the body of the article rather than having it partially hidden within a ref tag. Normally, text would go in the body, with the ref just being a link to the source. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It could be done; the reason I put it in a reference to begin with is because a: it seems pretty trivial to me; and b: I moved it to eliminate a trivia section in the first place. Killervogel5 (talk) 00:54, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This page has been plagiarized[edit]

I just found this link while looking for a source to verify some facts in the article. [1] Someone copied this entire article (or most of it) into the Jimmy Rollins wiki. As such, it's going to need a rewrite now to be original material or at least not copyright infringement. Killervogel5 (talk) 01:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Info[edit]

I'm not vandalising anything. I'm adding information to keep it current with the date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.75.157.143 (talk) 21:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

5-tool?[edit]

I've never seen him referred to as a 5-tool player. Never. I know that's an objective trait, but this is crazy. 204.16.25.238 (talk) 18:31, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know what the tools are? If you do, it's obvious that he meets the qualifications. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:09, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Since I don't know what the 5-tools are, let me look them up. 1. Hitting for average: he's a career .275 hitter. He's never hit over .300 in a season. Is that really hitting for average? 2. Hitting for power: twice he has hit 20 or more homers (yeah, he'll probably do it again this year too, but that only proves my point). He is too inconsistent. He hit 25 homers a few years ago, and he batted only .277; this year he'll get 20-21 homers, but he'll be lucky to break .250. Only in one season was he able to put it all together when he hit .296 and 30 homers. His power numbers just aren't there. We can say he has good power for a shortstop - which he does - but his hitting suffers for it. Yeah, real obvious. Back to what I said in my first note - I've never seen him referred to as a 5-tool player outside of blogs. 204.16.25.238 (talk) 14:15, 23 September 2009 (UTC) Surfbruddah (talk) 17:06, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And he's still a young player who has exhibited all five of the "five tools" throughout his career. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 14:42, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So you are saying a .275 hitter "excels in hitting for average"? Really? Man, I wish you were a pro-scout - if you think a career .275 hitter excels in hitting for average, a lot of us would have had a shot. Or maybe you think a five-tool player only needs to be above-average in the five-tools?

First, sign your posts. Second, I never said he excels; I said that he "has exhibited all five of the 'five tools' throughout his career". KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:12, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First, now you're nit-picking because you know you're beat. Second, the Wikipedia article for five tool players says "excels" - should we maybe chance that article to "above average hitter"? Surfbruddah (talk) 12:48, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why you think I'm "beat", because we probably should change that article. The reference used to support the fact doesn't say that the player "excels" in all five tools; it says that he possesses them (" Five-tool players get the key hits, big home runs, timely stolen bases, they throw out the tying run at the plate and make spectacular defensive plays."). Which Rollins does. For the record, your attitude ("now you're nit-picking because you know you're beat" and imitative speech) could be construed as uncivil. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:55, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a "citation needed" tag to the claim in the first paragraph that the subject is a 5-tool player when it's clear from his career statistics that he does not hit for average and power. This needs to be addressed, otherwise a "neutrality" tag will be added to the top of the article. bigpad (talk) 13:18, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since you felt the need to resurrect this, I added a cite from William Kashatus, a baseball authority who's written about Phillies history. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 14:25, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, a citation for such a big claim is essential, even if the subject's career stats simply don't back it up. If another editor wishes to challenge this "5-tool" stuff, he won't have far to look for evidence to the contrary. Thanks. bigpad (talk) 14:55, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy that something was added. I'm not sure what you meant by bigpad feeling the need to ressurect this. What else is the discussion page for? The matter wasn't settled and just because you got the last word doesn't make it so. I do want to point out that this online article is written by a William S. Kashatus. The only author I've heard of is a William C. Kashatus - is this a typo? As for my uncivil disposition - that's a bit much...Surfbruddah (talk) 22:13, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's not, and you're continuing. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:42, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Community" section[edit]

The community section is almost entirely self sourced and very promotional. It seems to be there only to taut how wonderful Mr Rollins is. Which would be all well and good, if someone else was saying it. With it all sourced to him or organizations he has ties with, I am just not buying it. Gtwfan52 (talk) 02:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy[edit]

This article is going to be useful someday to populate a legacy section. Not today. Go Phightins! 01:52, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source dump[edit]

Benching sources[edit]

[2][3][4][5]

hs scouting reports[edit]

[6][7][8] Go Phightins! 20:16, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Trade to the Dodgers needs to be approved[edit]

According to all reports, this deal will need to be approved by the Commissioner of Baseball to be allowed to happen because a lot of money is involved. Because of the amount of money, the Commissioner could technically prevent the deal from happening. Wait until he doesn't kill the deal. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:34, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They also still havent said who the Dodgers are sending to the Phillies in this trade. Spanneraol (talk) 01:46, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And I've read there might be a third team involved. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:00, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Jimmy Rollins/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wizardman (talk · contribs) 13:15, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]


As one of the five oldest noms awaiting a review, I'll go ahead and review this. Wizardman 13:15, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Wizardman. I believe Spanneraol and I are going to team up on responding to your comments, as Rollins is now a member of the Dodgers, so pinging him as well. Happy New Year. Go Phightins! 14:01, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here's what I found:

  • "To his dismay, his parents refused to allow him continue playing football, instead forcing him to focus on baseball." i don't think 'to his dismay' is needed; the rest of the sentence suffices, plus it's a slight stretch from what the source says.
  • Not a big deal, but adding when he debuted would be nice near the end of the minor league section.
  • There should be a citation for those first two sentences in 2001; or is the media guide in the next sentence the ref for that as well? (On a side note, while a media guide is fine as a ref, it's the type of ref that I would try to avoid overusing, and it's borderline in that regard here).
  • I'm not a big fan of the lead as written, as it feels a little jumbled, jumping from topic to topic (more so than a typical lead). It's one of those things that is difficult to explain through text, but take another read-through of it and you should see what I mean. Try rewriting it a bit.

Only through 2001 so far, will knock out the rest soon. Wizardman 16:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the rest:

  • " that hindered is progress" his progress
  • "causing manager Larry Bowa dropped him in the lineup" to drop him
  • " Throughout the season, he sought to maintain focus that he admittedly lost the previous season" Sounds a little odd as worded, and personally I'd just scrap it and just keep the stats that come after unless it can be reworded a lot better.
  • "Season highlights included an RBI single against John Smoltz in June to win a game" perhaps just "a game-winning RBI single" instead, just to make the wording crisper.
  • " The streak was the longest in Phillies' history, surpassing Ed Delahanty." noting what his streak was would be nice.
  • "but his quest for history terminated April 6 when he failed" it can just note it ended on the sixth, no reason to puff up the language.
  • "Rollins' season culminated when he was named the National League's Most Valuable Player." I'd take out the middle stuff and just say rollins was named MVP.
  • In 2008, linking the 2008 NLDS and 2008 NLCS might be beneficial.
  • "Rollins began 2009 by participating in the 2009 World Baseball Classic (WBC) as a member of Team USA; for his strong WBC performance, he was named to the all-tournament team." cite
  • " some questioned whether his MVP campaign in 2007 was a fluke." I've never need big on the "some said x" type of language. Adding a quote from a strong baseball source here would be beneficial, since IIRC there were quite a few big names that thought this.
  • "If the option does not vest, the option can become a team option for $8 million or a player option for $5 million." Given that he went elsewhere, this should be scrapped or reworded (did the Dodgers take this option?)
  • "Following the season, Rollins became the first ever co-Winner of the Roberto Clemente Award, sharing the honor with recently retired Chicago White Sox captain Paul Konerko." cite
  • Per my parentheses above, adding a bit on what happened with his contract now that he's on the Dodgers would be helpful, since I can't tell if they gave him a year, if the phillies picked up the option and traded him after, or if the dodgers were the ones that chose to pick up the option.
  • ""One of the best defensive shortstops in the game"," cite
  • Overall, in parts the article tries to get a little flowery with the language. It's infrequent, but the few times it happens do stand out. Do another quick read-through and rewrite anything overly journaly.

I'll place the article on hold and will give it another look-through after the above is fixed, likely passing it. Wizardman 15:44, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Everything reads much better now, so I'll pass this article. Wizardman 01:34, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Direct quotes[edit]

There's a lot of text in between quotation marks in this article, such as this recent edit about his defensive skills. Per WP:INTEXT, quoted text should be attributed to its originator (in addition to having a citation). However, attribution can mislead the reader that only the originator has that opinion if it was a widely-held position. Therefore, widely held positions should not use quoted text, while the remaining quotes should be attributed.—Bagumba (talk) 06:38, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

source dump[edit]

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/12400558/jimmy-rollins-says-new-york-mets-were-second-preferred-trade-destinations

I'm not sure if its really notable that he might have considered going to the Mets. Spanneraol (talk) 02:26, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not either, which is why I just dumped it here in case it could prove useful at a later date (i.e. he hits for the cycle against the Mets this season or something) ... if you look at talk pages of Phillies' player articles, any time I find something interesting, I often dump it on the talk page in case I ever need it. Go Phightins! 02:36, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Should the infobox picture revert to one of the Phillies-era pictures?[edit]

Seeing as he only played for the White Sox for less than half a season, should the main picture revert to one of him in a Phillies uniform?

I don't think so, as a) the White Sox are Rollins' most recent team, b) Rollins may get picked up by another team and c) he's not retired yet. When Rollins retires, which probably is going to come at the latest by the end of this season, then he should have his picture as a Phillie in the infobox, for obvious reasons. Terry Foote (talk) 13:41, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Baseball assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Jimmy Rollins/Comments (baseball), and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article has some good opening material, but is missing 4 years' worth of career information in the middle. It skips from 2002 to 2007 with nothing in between. This information should be added, and the trivia section removed/integrated before it could be promoted to B-class.Killervogel5 (talk) 13:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 13:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 14:21, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jimmy Rollins. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:48, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Jimmy Rollins. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:05, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jimmy_Rollins&oldid=1204964598"