CSS Button No Image Css3Menu.com
New! Search comments:
(NOTE: Relevance, Author, and Article are not applicable for comment searches)
But wait, what parade was it that Ferris & the Gang went to?
I want a BP writer who will be willing to give me an informed opinion about something that is occurring in baseball. I want that writer to be able to make the article I'm reading entertaining, interesting, and not seem like a graduate level stats course that I passed on the first time around. I want a BP writer that isn't afraid to try new things, but be willing to explain how these new things are MORE relevant than the things I already have at my disposal. I want a BP writer who is also willing to say "you know what, the last thing I wrote was wrong" or "I absolutely missed on that the last time, but here's why I think it happened rather than how I expected it to happen". I want a BP writer that can laugh at themselves, and not take themselves too seriously, while at the same time, presenting themselves to me, in the written word, as someone who is actually an expert in this field. I want a BP writer and website that continues the trend of changing the way *I* look at baseball, and how *I* take in a game, either live or on radio or on television.
I want more BP writers that have a love of the game itself, and not just as a means to get published or be a writer. I want more BP writers that can tell me why Team A and Team B are doing as well or poorly as they’re doing, because maybe I’ve missed something. I want BP to challenge the mainstream thinking MORE, even as the mainstream has adapted more thoughts from the BP community. I want more BP writers that are willing to engage in debate over why their ideas or thoughts might not make sense or might not be true in the grand scheme, but be willing to explain why they are right without being pompous about it (and this goes likewise for BP commenters as well).
Looking back over the last few weeks, I, personally, have found that I’ve read less and less things from BP. The worst thing that happened was that I didn’t check the site one day, and realized that it’s ok, I probably didn’t miss anything. And I didn’t. As baseball has become a year round sport, so has the analysis. That’s missing. I want MORE of that. And yet, I want more BP writers to use BP as an outlet to entertain.
Now, I’m speaking personally; there’s a reason that Normandian, KG, SG, CK, and Joe were *my* favorite writers. Mostly because I feel they have FUN with how they present things, especially in their respective niches. Conversely, I’m not a fan of Perotto and Will (this is NOT meant as disrespect to either writer, I think they do what they do VERY WELL), their writing just doesn’t do it for me.
So, if you want a simple answer, MORE personality.
KG, how high, overall, would you rate the A's as a system right now? Top Ten? Bit higher? Bit lower?
Great read as always, thanks.
What's so "horribly ill advised" about the Longoria contract?
It would be interesting to see the linegraph of these players value over the next ten years. I'm just shocked you have Prince so high; that Mo Vaughn comp seems more and more likely each time I see him "field". His decline will be qick, and might not see 2019.
What would this list have looked like in 1999?
1.000/1.000/1.000 slash line?
Or is my Slug wrong?
KG, Santana or Wieters? At any point does Santana pass Wieters? Are these 2 going to be AL All Star catchers for the next 10 years? (Behind Mauer?)
The thought process is likely to be Granderson to CF, Fukudome to RF.
As foe the breeze, I would think that the other things he does well (hit, good power, run, a good glove, etc) would outway the whiffs.
Where would Granderson rank on the list of available FA? He's be pretty high up, I would think.
Of course, this is all speculation on rumours and potential nonsense.
You know what, I don't care. Give me Granderson in CF and I'll be happy. Uber Happy.
What, it's going to lower Bradley's value even more? Is that even possible?
Worst part is, they'd already HAD Corey Patterson.
I do enjoy getting to see the look on Brewers fans face for this one though.
It's the small things, sometimes.
"Why does Milton Bradley Games tell Monopoly Players that all participants start with the same $2,500? Why not just let the first guy to show up at the board take a couple of fistfulls and allow the last few guys to the board fight over the last few 5 and 10 dollar bills."
But even the Monopoly Analogy has it's flaws. The board itself rewards further properties, and the owners of those properties, making the Yankees Park Place and Boardwalk, the Royals Belmont and Connecticut.
If the starting principals are viewed as National and MLB overall TV & Etc Revenue, and the rent is viewed as what their local revenues bring in, anyway.
This might just be the punishment for Listach over Lofton for ROY.
"For that matter, put those three players on ANY team, and see what their playoff chances are. Imagine ARod, CC, and Tex in Tampa's lineup, or the Marlins. Or even Pittsburgh."
Using WARP1 as a tool of measurement...
Adding CC, Burnett, Tex and ARod to the Pirates gives Pittsburgh +14 wins... or 76 wins. Enough to move them up to 5th in the NL Central.
Adding those four to the Rays give the Rays a margin of +8 wins, moving them to... 3rd place in the AL East. (Too be fair, this is substituting Arod for Longoria, and Evan was 2 wins better on the year)
"A salary cap in the NFL allows small market teams like Indianapolis and Pittsburgh to be among the most competitive. Without a salary cap could the Colts have afforded to keep Peyton Manning for his entire career? The Steelers have no fear of losing Big Ben to the highest bidder."
I'd argue that it's not the Salary Cap but rather the lack of guaranteed contracts that help NFL teams. The Colts will pay Edgerin James right up until the point he is no longer of value to the team, and then release him because there's no penalty not to. Whatever salary cap penalty there is, is insignificant on the short & long term.
"A salary cap in the NBA allows a small market team like San Antonio to remain competitive. It allows a team like Cleveland a reasonable chance to keep LeBron James. The Indians had no chance to resign Sabathia, but the Cavs have a chance to keep LeBron."
San Antonio remains competitive because they use their roster more effectively than any team in the NBA. It's built around a Superstar player (David Robinson, then Tim Duncan), a supporting star/superstar player(s) (Duncan, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobli), and 9-10 players who know their role and execute accordingly (Robert Horry, Bruce Bowen, Stephen Jackson, etc). The Spurs are not afraid to draft European players and let them develop and mature before coming to the states. This sounds like "Good management" rather than "NBA Salary Cap parity".
The Cavs can offer LeBron James $30MM and 1 year more in salary than any other team in the NBA, no matter their salary cap position. It's never cut and dry, but it seems to me there are other issues than the Salary Cap and player earnings at stake here for LeBron.
"A salary cap penalizes NFL and NBA teams that make bad decisions (see Knicks, Redskins) regardless of how much many they can spend. It can lead to big markets having teams that are among the worst."
Penalizes teams far more in the NBA than the lack of a salary cap does in MLB actually. It is also the cause for things like contracts of players not playing in the league being traded (Keith Van Horn, Theo Ratliff, etc). But you know what penalizes teams more than the salary cap? Losing. Losing leads to lower attendance, lower revenue from advertising, lower chances of being on national broadcasts, etc.
"The lack of a salary cap keeps bad decisions from penalizing MLB teams equally. The Yankees and Red Sox can recover from bad decisions and remain competitive just about every year. Most teams can't. "
Actually, this part I don't entirely disagree with. Having a larger revenue stream allows the Yanks and Sawx to take different risks & chances and absorb whatever losses come from them much easier.
"Sure different teams win the World Series just about every year - but they are never small market teams (like the Colts, Steelers or Spurs) and big market teams rarely have 95 or 100 loss seasons (like the Pirates and Royals)."
See above for the market breakdowns. Of course, it does fail to point out that the Patriots, Lakers and Pistons have been to a disproportionate (may not be the word I'm looking for) number of their leagues championship games as well.
I have it on good authority that strikeouts are fascist.
I look at this like the Manny situation... his bat is worth it right up until you have the lead and the defensive value per play makes it prudent for Jeter to come out of the game. The situation here, of course, was that Jeter was not due to hit in the 9th, if memory serves.
Irrelevant, of course, because Jeter will never be taken out of a game defensively.
Would I get the same answer if I asked the Lions and Browns?
And the umps are about to blow a GREAT play by Napoli
Which is why the Steelers and Patriots have appeared in 6 of the last 8 Super Bowls, the Eagles were in 4 straight NFC championship games and 5 in the last 8 years, The Cowboys and Niners played in NFC Championship games for 3 straight years against each other, and one team in 5 out of 6 years...
Can we do the Salary Cap next?
Kevin, I don't remember the curcumstances around Moskos over Wieters; was it the Pirates thinking they couldn't sign him, wouldn't pay him Boras's "demands", or other? What was the thought on Moskos on draft day?
Thanks... I was trying to imply this same argument last night and failed to put it in words as proper as this. I agree 100%, the basis for the neighborhood play has been to aid the middle infielder in avoiding contact and potential injury. It was not necessary in this specific instance.
Good reply, thanks.
Will, I wonder if this wasn't something that was... assumed, or believed intuitively by scouts as one of the reasons that they frown on shorter pitchers like Tim Hudson. Yes part of it was always durability, but maybe this was some of the immeasurables that we're just now learning how to measure and/or figure out.
Really some new food for thought. Who would of thought we'd be getting that from Fox of all places.
Why was Rudy fired from the Rangers? My impression was that the hitters liked his coaching, and that he did a fairly good job given the hitters he had.
Big win for the Cubs if they get him, no?
Joe... Yankees lineup this year stronger than the lineup in 1998?
Great job Clay, the masses will NEVER think to accuse you of rigging the machine to further put forth the notion that BP hates all things Phillies.
KG, are the Brewers going to really regret that Lopez for Gillespie swat in the long run (or even next year?)... just seems like he's been raking ever since leaving their organization.
Seems to me he'll have one job: Pitch to Utley and Howard in the 6th/7th innings (With Sherrill for the 8th/9th)...
The Dodger bullpen really matches up well against this lineup, somewhat neutralizing the need for deep SP, no? Seems like all you want your starters to do here is go 5 or 6, then cycle the bullpen. The offdays should mean that every pitcher is available barring a 2-3 IP stretch (Which is what Billingsly is still there for anyway).
Clearly Jay Jaffe and Baseball Prospectus and the Internets and the World hates the Phillies by making this prediction. Nevermind your sound writing, logical arguments and points, witty writings and the like. You should all be banned from the interwebs.
Fielding Grammy was full of win though. Good job Jay.
We sort of knew what you meant Joe... don't let the man gwt you down.
"...and then other teams got smart and realized that the teams doing that were the teams adding the most talent to their system. "
So what *should* be the purpose, adding the most talent or adding the BEST talent?
Using this year's Nats as an example, adding Strasburg was a no-brainer, but the 10th pick was another example of signability over talent hurting a team that can use all the BEST talent they can get.
Remember, this article was written for ESPN... they're used to "analysis" from Joe Morgan and Steve Phillips.
Thank you... they can't draft strassberg again without a waiver, correct?
KG... settle a discussion?
What do the nats get for compensation should they not sign strass?
To be honest, I read the hit list every week, and need to be reminded by little posts like above too... every once in a while it's good to provide a reminder/rejoinder for any new readers there are (which is what I assumed the reader was asking, rather than the usualy kvetching). Resets are appreciated.
CK... did you mean John Grabow for Joe Beimel in the Cubs comment?
Great work as usual otherwise, but HOW could you ignore REALLY commenting on the Corey Patterson to Milwaukee... that's just made for Epic Fail.
How is a week in the life of a Pedro Alvarez vs a guy at AA who probably won't see the Majors? How is it different, how are they treated by the team, organization, teammates, etc. Watching Billy Traber (or Pedro martinez tongiht), what's life like for them in the minors?
I remember reading some stuff when Michael Jordan was down in Birmingham, and some of the things he did for the players as a thank you for putting up with the press and nonsense some of them would NEVER see, and others would barely see when/if they made the majors.
KG, et al
Are we likely to see Alvarez in September, and could we see an Alvarez, Cedeno, Young, Clement infield just for fun the last month?
Surely Branyon is Russell's lesser known, Quad-A brother... played only up the middle positions.
So, Peavy just waived his no-trade clause without compensation? No guarantee of that option year?
That seems interesting, and I wonder what the Union has to say about it, OR I wonder if Peavy might ask to be traded in the off season.
Just out of curiosity, where would you have put that move in the context of his article? Or is this more "Joe doesn't like my team" kvetching?
So sorry to bother you. We'll go back to being serious now. Promise.
Excellent... Are we maybe doing our search in the wrong part of the US? Maybe the C in UCBL is Connecticut? U-Conn-Baynes Landing?
UCB is Bakersfield, right? I've always thought that Berkely was just Cal or UC...
Nevermind, found it.
University Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (UCBL) is the medical university of Lyon France, with a total of 2 091 teaching professors and 28 000 students...
So, what else came up when you googled UCBL? I still have no idea which school that is.
Have any scouts come out recently with a better comp offensively than Raffy Belliard that was bandied abotu earlier in his career? If not, then, no, I'd take a chance on Hardy bouncing back.
Reed Johnson vs Prince Fielder to win the game in Milwaukee on Sunday Night would probably be near the top of the list too.
Second the eccentricity part... Manny might be the only one who comes close, and he's more crazy than eccentric.
Jay... let's be honest... this has the potential to be the greatest HoF speech ever, right?
"Craptastic" is really the polite way to put it I think. Brutal? Horrid? Any of those descriptions works.
I wish we could get more of this type of content from the beloved BP staff. KGs prospect updates are turning into a daily read, this is usually one of my favorite reads of the week and will only be moreso in mini form (when I can read on my phone at work). Joe's daily stuff was always thought provoking.
Please, more things like this and less ESPN stuff that just reads like watered down articles that are apoor imitation of the writing we're used to by most of the BP Staff.
Thank you CK.
missed that part i guess by only browsing the transactions part. Thanks.
Well... first part down, Freel to the Royals for a PTBNL
Joe, just putting it out there... Prince Fielder is one of the 4 1B reps in the NL... and there's a case that he'd be the 4th or 5th best 1Bman in the NL Central?
I agree with you in the most part, how ARod can be left off in particular, but I don't have a problem with the managers focusing on this season over the whole body of work for those last few spots (Especially if/when it gets down to team reps).
You know what, the game itself is run so poorly, that I only ever root for a tie again anyway.
The writers differentiated very well, all things considered, even within the actual "game recaps"...
IMHO, I still don't think it made for the best week of writing overall.
Irony can be so ironic sometimes.
If we vote for everybody this week, can we get all 5 back to do a better topic?
This is/was an extremely dull week, and not because of the writers who (mostly) tried to do their best with the subject(s) at hand. It didn't appear to me that the working on a deadline aspect hindered them, at least not more than the game recap point did.
I enjoy reading recaps when Joe and/or CK do them, because I'll often learn something different, or can appreciate a different POV or opinion or a reaffirmation of a thought or idea I already had about a game/team/player/stadium/etc. Putting the Idolers through a process that is, frankly, done better by the AP game story team doesn't seem fair to them. I just worry that we're about to lose a good writer because of gimmick.
I had to reread the article to decide a thumbs up/down vote... I'm goign thumbs up just for the ballsy decision to go away from the traditional recap and steer it towards Pat Burrell and the World Series aspect.
Not sure that it shines out, but I agree this was a really poor week, and am willing to blame the topic rather than the writers.
It gets a thumbs up from me, I guess, because it was well written and seemed JUST the right length to keep my interest from wandering.
A couple of grammar/spelling errors, though, almost dinged you down. Just something to lookout for the next time.
4th Article for me and probably the most sound so far. I'm with KG (again) on this, I didn't really find much interest in the article until the Key Decisions part, and would have liked more of that.
4/5 of the way through, nobody got an instant thumbs up. Is this like American Idol doing Gangsta Rap week? Do the writers really need to be so versatile that they're being pushed to do a concept or niche that they aren't really built/trained/molded for?
Not Brian's best effort. Third article I've read this week, and the third one I've been underwhelmed by.
My biggest issue was that this is a game played by two teams in forth place in their respective divisions. I never felt the hook early on that made me want to stay with the article.
That being said, I liked the tie back to your work on Brett Cecil and the wrap up around Joey Votto. Would have liked to seen maybe a more indepth work that way.
This is the first entry I got to read this week, and my quick reaction was more KG than Will and CK. Knowing what the topic was this week, I've readied myself to read 5 recaps that might not really differentiate from each other too much.
I liked the stream of consciousness (as KG put it) for this reason. I like the humour. I like the tangents (it's an interleague baseball game in late June. If it was Cubs/Cards or Tigers/Sox etc, it takes a little more importance, but not really). But most importantly, I *LOVED* that when he made a note with an *, the accompanying note was right below the paragraph so I didn't have to follow down to the end of the article.
I guess the one thing that didn't work for me was the bitching about the umpires, the tag play in particular. That's a play that is called the same way each time, and for both teams throughout a season, that I'm not sure if the effort and time (and word count used) to gripe about it is worth it in the long run.
I'm still tetering on the thumbs up/down... but I'd imagine this will get the thumbs up and might be the best of the week just because of the irreverance. Plus, Match Game reference.
There are a few issues that come up here. I want to touch on the big ones.
The Union is against anything that will prohibit in any way a player from making as much money as he can make. There is a bit of a two-fold ideology. The "Stars" will always be taken care of (A-Rod and Pujols, etc), cap or no cap. But it's the mid-level and lower players who are going to be hurt by a cap because a team will have a higher % of their "Cap" spent on one player. So you're inhibiting a larger % of players from making the most they can.
The second part is the transparency of baseball revenues. There is still a divide among large, medium and small market teams that prevents the revenue streams from being completely transparent. While it has gotten better, there is some discussion about how the local TV revenues should be split (i.e. why should the Yankees give the Royals money from the YES network, etc). There is still distrust and discord amongst all parties about how the new revenue streams (MLB.com & mlbtv, etc) are being distributed.
I hope to come across as neutral as I can for this part of the debate. But be warned, I'm one of those pro-player, pro-union, anti-owner wacos y'all have been talking about.
Matthew, it was a tough week. I personally didn't think any of the articles stood out as head and shoulders above the others.
But thanks for the entertainment the last few weeks and best of luck. I doubt we've heard the last of you.
Hmmmm... I read BP because I can both learn things AND be entertained.
Awesome. That is one of my favorite jokes too.
But. I have a regional question; has anyone heard that joke with a different punchline? (Mays, Aaron, Williams, etc)
I have a feeling that I will somehow be blamed for this now.
Out of curiosity, which team(s) do you think are more likely to... normalize? The Cubs (with Bradley, Aramis, Soto coming back to their expected production) or the Brewers and/or Cards regressing to their expected performance?
And does 84 wins win this division by 4 games this year?
Will, all of our playful banter aside, do you think it's possible that there could be another "cluster" in the DR? Manny, Arod and Sammy all lay claims to home there (some more than others, don't know if Arod gets back to the DR much anymore), and without researching too hard (Fingers still owied) I seem to remember a few more DR based players.
Also, wouldn't DR players have more to gain/less to lose at this point? I wouldn't think the "stink" of steroid abuse plays out the same in the DR than it does in the US, where the MSM is more interested in selling its story/newspapers/program than getting the story right?
(this post was NOT spell checked, so spelling errors are on me)
I *think* he meant that it'd be better/less of a PR hit to make the deals now, rather than later in the season when they might be closer in the standings, but still not really a contender for the division/wild card.
And I agree Fields doesn't nothing for the Cubs.
No, I get the point. However, this isn't a debate that's come up in the last 3 weeks, it's one that has been had off and on for the last 3 years.
It does add a new perspective too it though.
Valid point, but somewhat moot given this has been a Howard argument for the last few years, and Ibanez is still relatively shiny and new to the Phillies roster.
how is that different than me paying taxes into a school system that i don't use or state programs that i pay into but never use.
being able to vote for all of them is great. but i found myself deciding on my own to at best/worst leave one blank so asa not to cancel out all votes.
Shocking that Will Carroll didn't enjoy the humour in an article. Shocking on the level of Rich Harden getting injured.
Not my favorite piece, and like Will I had to give it a second go, but a vote to live another day.
The template for this article seemed to be how the past will help us determine the future. It may not have been what Kevin had in mind in a player profile, but seemed to be sufficient in this context.
I'm a little put off by using quotes and profiles from BP (whether it's books or the Cards) though. That seemed to be a bit... lazy (for lack of a better word I guess)... or information I already have at my disposal. Just my 2cents on that one.
Gets a vote (for now) anyway.
Very good. I don't think this has closed the debate on Howard's platoon split and whether the Phils would be better or worse off if they had a RHB-Lefty Masher.
Some arguments refuse to die, and I'm firmly with the Sheehan on this one.
You're absolutely (mostly) right... and I'm tired of having this argument with people. It just gets so old, and it's a forever losing battle when most of the talking heads in the MSM promote that same mantra.
I don't know what's worse, that in the years (and years and years) I've been reading BP, that I can't tell if they're still part of the solution, or becoming part of the problem anymore.
You know what, I'd love to see this in the auto industry right now. You could have a draft of all the executives/engineers/etc from all the American car companys... but maybe Ford holds out hope, and pays a record fee for a Japanese car maker's top engineer?
I'm not sure if this would help or hurt the car industry, but it sure might be amusing to watch the talking heads collectively explode over this.
Did we ever get an answer to the first one? Jeff Weaver seems right I guess.
The last 2 paragraphs seemed to be a result of the word limit. And a clear case of where something that might be interesting is hurt by having to conform to that restriction.
I understand why it's there, but as a voter, I'm also willing to see that it can be a hinderance and not take away a vote because of it.
More imortantly, now I have to research who the other pitcher was.
Like Will I was left with wanting more, which I think is a good thing here.
I do think that the Hall of Famers section was a bit TOO much speculation, and wonder if maybe using JAWS scores (or something similar) might not have been better, just to put a bit of weight behind the writer's thoughts.
Thumbs up, but the criticisms are worth noting. I wonder though, if the nature of competition and showing that the writer can do many different things is partially at fault here. Any one of the three would have been interesting, but did seem somewhat crowded in a 1500 word piece.
Of course, how could I NOT vote for a Madison Mallard article though?
Will (and Kevin), no injury is a good injury, but this injury isnt' bad, right? It seems that they looked at the elbow (and probably the shoulder) before looking at arm itself, and didn't notice anything there that might be worrisome?
The "Staff ace" moniker was captioned under the Kuroda picture on the front page. Assuming you don't do the captions Jay, but might want to mention that to the HPIC or editor or what not.
If bowden were still in charge, maybe.
If anyone knew the location of Pirates officials during this event, I'm listening.
Still not renewing until next February or March or whenever :)
So... where do I vote to give this article a thumbs up?
Prospectus Idol has made me confused.
The criticism you're getting is that I can read that article anywhere, but the value of a BP writer saying this is FAR greater than Blogger Joe saying this.
Gets a vote, but maybe next week it won't. Need to step up a bit.
I disagree on Cain to a point... Tyler's point was to sell high on Cain and buy low on Lester, taking advantage of the fact other owners in your league might not be privy to the thought processes that we (as BP subscribers) are privy to.
"Take a player like Carl Crawford, who enters Friday hitting .318 with a .380 Babip. Crawford's Babip is above his average, which means he's finding a lot of holes and figures to come down some."
I read this and *thought* she meant that Crawford's BABIP was above his average BABIP over his career. I know that was a big deal with CKs analysis and some of the other comments, but worth noting another view.
That said, the sentence wasn't very clear in the first place. I voted for it, only because I don't think this was a good topic for you.
In Yahoo leagues, Wieters was NOT on the early drafting lists, and was not elgible to be picked up in the 2 leagues I'm in until he made the majors.
Just an FYI.
An interesting idea, but seems to me it's been done better through the various stats that have been mentioned above.
However, as someone who started doing auction league this season, there's no going back. I'm not sure how this would apply to that style and the strategies used there, where as PFM does that specifically for me with that program.
Well written, but the the topic pulls it down to a no vote.
I really liked this article. And I'm really disappointed in Will's analysis of it.
For a lot of us, BP was an introduction to sabremetrics, and taught a lot of us to think differently, expand our thought processes, realize that there were more than a few ways to do and/or analyze something, etc. We didn't have Bill James, because James wasn't writing as much anymore, but we did have BP, Neyer, Shandler, etc.
I didn't get everything on the technical side. But I did realize I'd be able to learn, and it made it seem not so scary. That gave it a thumbs up on it's own.
One other point. Did NOT like the using of old numbers for pitchers and current numbers for hitters.
Not necessarily boring to me, but I DID feel like I've read it some where before, on maybe the thousand of other fantasy columns that are out there.
Being a strategy I have used in leagues, and am using in one this season, it didn't cover new ground NOR reinforce that it's a stronger option than others.
CK hit on some good nitpicky stat and number points too.
Kevin, strictly for fantasy purposes, what's Beckham's upside for the rest of the year, AL 5x5.
The walk across the Bay is what gives me chills.
Joe, find your thoughts on Nationals Park interesting. I have the exact same feeling in Miller Park, with the added "bonus" of always feeling indoors, even with the roof and panels open.
It's made the local news and papers and ESPN had a blurb on it on one of their bottom line crawls this weekend.
Couldn't the Padres have had Gwynn Jr. for free at the start of the season? I'm pretty sure he was out of options and lost the 5th OF slot to Chris Duffy.
So they didn't want him for free, but were willing to give up a useful OF to get him. O...kay?
Whew... Mony Fariss....
I never lost faith in you, Baseball Reference.
ESPNs bottom line just showed a statmeent that their computer odds whatever adjusted for losing Manny for 50 games, dropping their percentage to make the playoffs from 71 to 65 (give or take).
So manny was taking the un-clear? Oh wait. Read thoroughly robert.
Being a Cubs fan, I was worried it might have been Aramis. Having Hanley in my 2 fantasy leagues. I was also worried. I wouldn't have put it past Will to post that exact headline with a story on Max or Horacio either.
So, you're saying I should stay away from all things ESPN for a few days then? Cuz, you know, there's no way they won't over report that in any way shape or form.
Well, without looking or thinking TOO hard about it, i'm assuming Hawk's DH days were after he was a Cub, and I KNOW his knees were shot by that time, and wasn't exactly covering a lot of ground in RF by the last years there.
CK, fragility aside, the one thing I notice upon reading this article is that none of the players on the list played a tough defensive position (save molitor & edgar who had more severe injury problems thant even Milton. Do we know what effect this will have on the experiment?
No love for Cubs @ Cards this weekend? Especially after mentioning the Bradley incident and the Lou-TLR barbs?
More east coast bias :)
Isn't this why the "intern" was invented? (skipping the obvious Clinton joke)
Jay and Kevin... no kidding, that little debate with the readers is THE reason you should have had comments here 5 years ago, and is the reason I'll renew my membership again. A civil, nearly level headed discussion, and both of you are NOT wrong about what you're saying.
Seriously, that's why I read thsi site first thing every day.
Will, as a Cub fan, and a Harden fan, I've been wondering if maybe he's not the perfect guy right now to use as the old school "Sunday Starter"... he knows when he's going to pitch, he has a set amount of rest between starts (that can be skipped in certain occasions) and also provides the occasional extra day of rest for Zambrano...
Do you think someday we'll see this again? It seems like it'd be a great idea here, or with guys like Smoltz, or with Clemens and/or Schilling before they retired for good.
I've always thought that the "Moneyball" approach was just taking a broader "marketing" aspect to running a baseball team. Key phrases like "bang for buck" or "value for our dollar" were all the hot phrases we'd use in the staff rooms.
That said, I'm still glad that MLB and their stadiums are much more lenient than some of the race track owner/operators have become over time.
Joe, I would have liked to see how this argument is weighted considering the use of a UTIL or DH spot. Rather, shouldn\'t we consider the difference between Reyes and the 11th best SS and Pujols and/or ARod vs the 18th or 20th best CI?