I have a problem with #16 and #17. Clearly the Colordo Rockies (the original Rockies) are better than the lame San Francisco version. Am I right or am I right?

WRT Mujica on the Padres, I was looking at him as a fantasy player and he's only got 6 k's in his last 17-1/3 innings, dating back to the beginning of June. Has the league caught up to him?

I love the fact that BP is willing to (even enthusiastic about?!) examine and re-evaluate predictions, assumptions, etc. So few in the media (or any walk of life) do so.

I'm not so sure the White Sox "may well be the favorites to land Roy Halladay". Attendance was down for the first half of the season and would be a factor in any move by the Sox. Kenny Williams has had little to say about acquiring anybody let alone Halladay.

Paul

Don't laugh, but is Brad Lidge really "homer-prone"? In his career, I mean; obviously he is having a terrible season right now. BR tells me his career average HR/9 is .9. For comparison, Joe Nathan's is .8, as is Trevor Hoffman's. Papelbon is at .7.

Mo Rivera is at .5, of course, but that strikes me more as the gold standard than a baseline of comparison.

Explain this to me. You write "the Mariners have an even worse offense than I projected", and yet you nailed their runs scored EXACTLY: "(me: 641 RS, 671 RA; projected: 641 RS, 674 RA)".

The Mariners have exactly the offense you projected, unless your projection somehow included a bunch of bad luck.

I was startled by the put-down of Ryan Zimmerman- I don't know a lot about his recent career, but his EQA is to date up 20 points on 2008. Is this harsh view justified?

If the Indians were to put Victor Martinez on the block, I would imagine they'd get more than Angel Villalona back in return. Not to mention, that's more or less the exact type of prospect the Indians shouldn't target - a slugging corner player - considering that's mostly what they already have.

Ahh I would say Colby Rasmus is part of the Cardinals core and is a good player all ready (2.9 WAR, good for 12th in the NL).

And Ryan Ludwick too. Those guys are both hitting like they can now and as a result I think you're badly underselling their chances, Joe.

Im a die hard rangers fan

and i really do not want to see a trade for halladay, the rangers aren't gonna win this year, and having hallady could push them into the playoffs, it would be for the cost of the future.

to me not worth. considering the rangers have a bevvy of interesting pitching prospects coming up.

why rob the future when the angles are on the way down and the rangers (finally, finally)are on the way up

so please. JD dont trade for halladay, two months of halladay isnt worth three years of smoak and feliz

Joe, no offense, but no non-SF GM would pull any of those Villalona-related trades.

One thing I'm not getting here: We are told in BP, again and again, that frequent strikeouts by a hitter are not a bad thing, because what counts is not how you make the out, but how frequently you make them. At the same time, we are told that if pitchers get more of their outs via balls in play than average, and fewer strikeouts, that IS a bad thing. You can't have it both ways, Joe.

My suspicion is that it's the analysis of the pitch-to-contact approach that needs tuning. One exercise that I have not seen done, and may try to do if I get some time, is the following: Create a scatter plot with K/9 on the x axis and BABIP on the y axis, and plot where various pitchers fall on that graph. Of course, there will be a scatter; pure luck will see to that. However, there may be some groupings. Then recreate the same scatter plot for 2008, 2007, etc., and see who, if anyone, falls into the same groupings, and the same location on the graph, from year to year. This analysis may show whether pitch-to-contact is being viewed correctly. (Or then again, it may not.)

"The X factor is Roy Halladay, a pitcher the Rangers can afford both talent-wise and financially, and who would make them the favorites in the West over the Angels. Unless they make that kind of addition, however, they’ll slip under .500 by the end of the year."

Exactly how many wins do you think Roy Halladay will be worth? The Angels are on pace to win about 90 games. The difference between sub-.500 and catching the Angels is ten wins over half a season. That seems unreasonable. Even if you think it takes 85 games to win the division (which seems low given records and performance so far), that makes Halladay a 10 WAR pitcher over a full season.

Still not sure how one year of flukey HR/FB makes Hoffman homer prone. At this point can't we just agree that people overreacted to the HR spike last year? Granted he will eventually give up some HR but if any season was really a fluke it was last year.