Matt Holiday?

17 Seconds · June 6, 2009

what trend?

Where did I say I think he's a "badass .900+ OPS guy?"

when we're talking about giving up a really good package of prospects and moving to soriano for a 3 month rental, don't you think it should be for a badass hitter?

Sammy Sofa · June 6, 2009

what trend?

Where did I say I think he's a "badass .900+ OPS guy?"

when we're talking about giving up a really good package of prospects and moving to soriano for a 3 month rental, don't you think it should be for a badass hitter?

Not necessarily. It depends on what the package is. Given that he is likely a rental and he has vocalized his desire to play for a better team, a GM might not have to give up the world for him. If Hendry would have to seriously overpay, no, stay away, but if he can be reasonably had I would go for it. I think this team needs a serious offensive boost over the long haul more than anything else, especially given Bradley's likely missing more time and Aramis coming back from an injury like that. I think he's a very good hitter and would be a huge boost for this lineup. I think he's really the best hitter that's out there that the Cubs have a chance of getting and he's far better than the other stopgap names that aren't going to contribute nearly as much. I would happily take Soriano at 2nd if it meant having someone like Holliday in there every day alongside Bradley (when he can play) and Aramis (with whatever he can contribute).

17 Seconds · June 6, 2009

well if the price is right i'd be interested, but it seems like he's going to be THE bat that everybody wants to get. i feel like we'd have to compete with several teams to get him, and the price will end up being pretty high.... especially with the way he's heating up

Sammy Sofa · June 6, 2009

well if the price is right i'd be interested, but it seems like he's going to be THE bat that everybody wants to get. i feel like we'd have to compete with several teams to get him, and the price will end up being pretty high.... especially with the way he's heating up

Then it might just have to be the big deal as opposed to going after someone like Peavy if the Cubs want any kind of a shot of winning it all this year.

17 Seconds · June 6, 2009

i don't know. with the way this organzaition seems to be headed (aging sluggers, big contracts, etc) i think trading away a good chunk of your remaining good prospects for a rental of holliday seems like a bad idea. we can't afford many more bad moves. i know we'd get the picks, but with our recent drafts that doesn't as appealing. if it came down to holliday or nobody, then i'd almost rather keep the prospects. i just don't see holliday as the piece that pushes us over the top, especially when it forces soriano to second. i don't think holliday is THAT good

Little Slide Rooter · June 6, 2009

well if the price is right i'd be interested, but it seems like he's going to be THE bat that everybody wants to get. i feel like we'd have to compete with several teams to get him, and the price will end up being pretty high.... especially with the way he's heating up

Then it might just have to be the big deal as opposed to going after someone like Peavy if the Cubs want any kind of a shot of winning it all this year.

Right now, the big bat is what we need. Starting pithing is our strong suit. However, I dont think Holliday is in the cards, more like an Aubrey Huff or Hnk Blalock, but you never know what Jim can pull off. Mid season trades are where he shines.

Sammy Sofa · June 6, 2009

i don't know. with the way this organzaition seems to be headed (aging sluggers, big contracts, etc) i think trading away a good chunk of your remaining good prospects for a rental of holliday seems like a bad idea. we can't afford many more bad moves. i know we'd get the picks, but with our recent drafts that doesn't as appealing. if it came down to holliday or nobody, then i'd almost rather keep the prospects. i just don't see holliday as the piece that pushes us over the top, especially when it forces soriano to second. i don't think holliday is THAT good

Then they need to seriously and realistically re-evaluate what their goals are this season. Offense seems to be the main thing they need to improve for the rest of this season, though even if they do that there's still the bullpen to potentially blow too many games. It very well might come down that a big trade of any kind simply is not the the smart thing to do.

Backtobanks · June 6, 2009

i don't know. with the way this organzaition seems to be headed (aging sluggers, big contracts, etc) i think trading away a good chunk of your remaining good prospects for a rental of holliday seems like a bad idea. we can't afford many more bad moves. i know we'd get the picks, but with our recent drafts that doesn't as appealing. if it came down to holliday or nobody, then i'd almost rather keep the prospects. i just don't see holliday as the piece that pushes us over the top, especially when it forces soriano to second. i don't think holliday is THAT good

Then they need to seriously and realistically re-evaluate what their goals are this season. Offense seems to be the main thing they need to improve for the rest of this season, though even if they do that there's still the bullpen to potentially blow too many games. It very well might come down that a big trade of any kind simply is not the the smart thing to do.

I don't think a big trade is going to happen to help the offense. Fontenot has improved some lately and each day that goes by puts us closer to ARam's return. As long as the Cubs keep their head above .500 and no team starts running away with the NL Central, I think Hendry will wait it out and save his trade chips for Peavy.

badnews · June 6, 2009

I think taking on more big money in hopes of this being the year is akin to getting the transmission and engine rebuilt on a 1991 Vokswagon Rabbit.

I still don't understand what makes anyone think we're 1 or even 2 players away from the World Series. The Cleveland Indians are proof you can't wait for players to "do what they're supposed to do." You would need to replace Soriano and two other guys for this offense to get remotely close to something that doesn't crap out in the first round of the playoffs.

Sammy Sofa · June 6, 2009

i don't know. with the way this organzaition seems to be headed (aging sluggers, big contracts, etc) i think trading away a good chunk of your remaining good prospects for a rental of holliday seems like a bad idea. we can't afford many more bad moves. i know we'd get the picks, but with our recent drafts that doesn't as appealing. if it came down to holliday or nobody, then i'd almost rather keep the prospects. i just don't see holliday as the piece that pushes us over the top, especially when it forces soriano to second. i don't think holliday is THAT good

Then they need to seriously and realistically re-evaluate what their goals are this season. Offense seems to be the main thing they need to improve for the rest of this season, though even if they do that there's still the bullpen to potentially blow too many games. It very well might come down that a big trade of any kind simply is not the the smart thing to do.

I don't think a big trade is going to happen to help the offense. Fontenot has improved some lately and each day that goes by puts us closer to ARam's return. As long as the Cubs keep their head above .500 and no team starts running away with the NL Central, I think Hendry will wait it out and save his trade chips for Peavy.

At this point I'd prefer to use the parts to get Peavy elsewhere.

Sammy Sofa · June 6, 2009

I think taking on more big money in hopes of this being the year is akin to getting the transmission and engine rebuilt on a 1991 Vokswagon Rabbit.

I still don't understand what makes anyone think we're 1 or even 2 players away from the World Series. The Cleveland Indians are proof you can't wait for players to "do what they're supposed to do." You would need to replace Soriano and two other guys for this offense to get remotely close to something that doesn't crap out in the first round of the playoffs.

The reality is you have to work with what you have. Despite how this year has gone, with this division the Cubs are still potentially a player or 2 away from the a WS so long as they can get into the playoffs.

Though I'm curious as to who you'd put into the lineup to better ensure a 1st round win seeing as creating a "1st round team," or even a playoffs team in general, seems like a fool's errand.

SouthSideRyan · June 6, 2009

It's foolish to say the Cubs are 3 players away from the world series when there's a nonzero chance they could win the world series without making a move al year.

Backtobanks · June 6, 2009

I think taking on more big money in hopes of this being the year is akin to getting the transmission and engine rebuilt on a 1991 Vokswagon Rabbit.

I still don't understand what makes anyone think we're 1 or even 2 players away from the World Series. The Cleveland Indians are proof you can't wait for players to "do what they're supposed to do." You would need to replace Soriano and two other guys for this offense to get remotely close to something that doesn't crap out in the first round of the playoffs.

For the umteenth time, the playoffs are a crapshoot. While the Cubs haven't looked good all year, things have been improving. Fontenot, Bradley, and Soto are all better than they have shown this year. Ramirez has shown his importance to this lineup by his absence. Finally, Soriano is the epitome of a streak hitter and if he gets hot during the playoffs, he could carry the team alone. That explains the playoffs, whichever team is hot at that time wins.

sneakypower · June 7, 2009

lol dexxies at it again with career road numbers

i wonder why a player wouldn't hit as well in at&t or petco park as coors. these are things you'd have to worry about if you didn't want a guy to play in a hitters park

which is what wrigley is

17 Seconds · June 7, 2009

lol dexxies at it again with career road numbers

i wonder why a player wouldn't hit as well in at&t or petco park as coors. these are things you'd have to worry about if you didn't want a guy to play in a hitters park

which is what wrigley is

yeah, i'm so silly for paying attention to road numbers when talking about a guy who played his home games at coors. i bring up road numbers because those are the only neutral numbers we have to look at for him. i don't know why that's hard for you to understand. holliday has never ops'd .900 without the help of coors, and he's only come close to it once. i guess he was just unlucky on the road for several years in a row, huh?

and wrigley is only a hitters park when the wind is blowing out, which is only like half the time. comparing it to coors is dumb. not surprising you'd bring that up.

if you aren't smart enough to realize that hitters who play in parks like coors field and arlignton have inflated numbers and refuse to look at obvious splits, then you're not really worth talking to.

p.s. your sig doesnt make him look dumb. it makes you look dumb for wasting your time in fantasy leagues with morons. congrats.

NonProfitCow · June 7, 2009

lol dexxies at it again with career road numbers

i wonder why a player wouldn't hit as well in at&t or petco park as coors. these are things you'd have to worry about if you didn't want a guy to play in a hitters park

which is what wrigley is

yeah, i'm so silly for paying attention to road numbers when talking about a guy who played his home games at coors. i bring up road numbers because those are the only neutral numbers we have to look at for him. i don't know why that's hard for you to understand. holliday has never ops'd .900 without the help of coors, and he's only come close to it once. i guess he was just unlucky on the road for several years in a row, huh?

and wrigley is only a hitters park when the wind is blowing out, which is only like half the time. comparing it to coors is dumb. not surprising you'd bring that up.

if you aren't smart enough to realize that hitters who play in parks like coors field and arlignton have inflated numbers and refuse to look at obvious splits, then you're not really worth talking to.

p.s. your sig doesnt make him look dumb. it makes you look dumb for wasting your time in fantasy leagues with morons. congrats.

Are Holliday's numbers inflated due to Coors? Of course. Does that mean that his away numbers are his true talent level? Of course not.

17 Seconds · June 7, 2009

lol dexxies at it again with career road numbers

i wonder why a player wouldn't hit as well in at&t or petco park as coors. these are things you'd have to worry about if you didn't want a guy to play in a hitters park

which is what wrigley is

yeah, i'm so silly for paying attention to road numbers when talking about a guy who played his home games at coors. i bring up road numbers because those are the only neutral numbers we have to look at for him. i don't know why that's hard for you to understand. holliday has never ops'd .900 without the help of coors, and he's only come close to it once. i guess he was just unlucky on the road for several years in a row, huh?

and wrigley is only a hitters park when the wind is blowing out, which is only like half the time. comparing it to coors is dumb. not surprising you'd bring that up.

if you aren't smart enough to realize that hitters who play in parks like coors field and arlignton have inflated numbers and refuse to look at obvious splits, then you're not really worth talking to.

p.s. your sig doesnt make him look dumb. it makes you look dumb for wasting your time in fantasy leagues with morons. congrats.
Are Holliday's numbers inflated due to Coors? Of course. Does that mean that his away numbers are his true talent level? Of course not.

But that's all we have to go on. Looking at Coors numbers is pointless

Im not saying Holliday isn't a good hitter. He is. I'm saying that his numbers are inflated by Coors. It's pretty obvious that they are

imb · June 7, 2009

p.s. your sig doesnt make him look dumb. it makes you look dumb for wasting your time in fantasy leagues with morons. congrats.

lol you are so oddly aggressive. "I BET U GET LAID A LOT HUH"

17 Seconds · June 7, 2009

well it's common knowledge that internet hecklers with unique avatars get tons of ass

NonProfitCow · June 7, 2009

lol dexxies at it again with career road numbers

i wonder why a player wouldn't hit as well in at&t or petco park as coors. these are things you'd have to worry about if you didn't want a guy to play in a hitters park

which is what wrigley is

yeah, i'm so silly for paying attention to road numbers when talking about a guy who played his home games at coors. i bring up road numbers because those are the only neutral numbers we have to look at for him. i don't know why that's hard for you to understand. holliday has never ops'd .900 without the help of coors, and he's only come close to it once. i guess he was just unlucky on the road for several years in a row, huh?

and wrigley is only a hitters park when the wind is blowing out, which is only like half the time. comparing it to coors is dumb. not surprising you'd bring that up.

if you aren't smart enough to realize that hitters who play in parks like coors field and arlignton have inflated numbers and refuse to look at obvious splits, then you're not really worth talking to.

p.s. your sig doesnt make him look dumb. it makes you look dumb for wasting your time in fantasy leagues with morons. congrats.
Are Holliday's numbers inflated due to Coors? Of course. Does that mean that his away numbers are his true talent level? Of course not.

But that's all we have to go on. Looking at Coors numbers is pointless

Im not saying Holliday isn't a good hitter. He is. I'm saying that his numbers are inflated by Coors. It's pretty obvious that they are

Looking at Coors numbers are pointless? Seriously? You're grasping at straws that don't exist dexter.

17 Seconds · June 7, 2009

You must be joking. Acting like Coors stats are an accurate measurement of a players worth is dumb, yeah.

Home/Road splits for Holliday's career

04 home- .338/.406/.603 (1.009) (10 HR)

04 away- .240/.287/.367 (.654) (4 HR)

05 home- .357/.409/.593 (1.002) (12 HR)

05 away- .256/.313/.416 (.729) (7 HR)

06 home- .373/.440/.692 (1.132) (22 HR)

06 away- .280/.333/.485 (.819) (12 HR)

07 home- .376/.435/.722 (1.157) (25 HR)

07 away- .301/.374/.485 (.860) (11 HR)

08 home- .332/.413/.584 (.997) (15 HR)

08 away- .308/.405/.486 (.892) (10 HR)

Career home- .352/.420/.634 (1.054) (88 HR)

Career away- .282/.351/.457 (.808) (44 HR)

Uhh, yeah. SLIGHTY SUSPICIOUS

In a neutral park, which half of those numbers is he more likely to come close to? I think it's pretty obvious, assuming you know what numbers are.

The good news is that his road numbers have gotten progressively better each year. I think he can probably ne like a .900 OPS guy in a neutral park right now. Is he a really good hitter? Probably. You can take into account the fact that many hitters hit better at home too. The point is, when there are GIGANTIC splits EVERY single year of his career, it is extremely obvious that his numbers are greatly influenced by that park. I think this is common sense. I didn't think people still fell for Coors numbers, even after the humidor.

Like I said, I'm not acting like Holliday isn't a very good hitter or that he's not a big middle of the order bat. He probably is. But is he the .980-1.000ish OPS guy that he's been over the last 3 years? Doubtful, unless you want to pretend like Coors didn't help his numbers at all.

The problem is, he's going to be THE big bat on the market. Teams are going to be competing for him, and the team that gets him is probably going to pay like he's a 1.000 OPS guy, when really he's probably like a .900 OPS guy.

So before you respond with something that implies that I'm saying Holliday isn't good or that Coors is the only reason he's good, please read my entire post. Never have I said Holliday isn't a good hitter. I just think it would be stupid to not realize he's not as good as he's been the past few years.

All I'm saying is that Coors made him look like Manny Ramirez, when really he's probably more like Jason Bay (pre-2009 Jason Bay, that is).

Edited June 7, 2009 by 17 Seconds

badnews · June 7, 2009

The playoffs are not enough of a crapshoot that this team's offense can get it past the first round. The pitchers the Cubs are capable of consistently beating up are not the ones they will face in the playoffs.

This team is not close enough to be considering trades like Matt Holliday and such.

NonProfitCow · June 7, 2009

You must be joking. Acting like Coors stats are an accurate measurement of a players worth is dumb, yeah.

Home/Road splits for Holliday's career

04 home- .338/.406/.603 (1.009) (10 HR)
04 away- .240/.287/.367 (.654) (4 HR)

05 home- .357/.409/.593 (1.002) (12 HR)
05 away- .256/.313/.416 (.729) (7 HR)

06 home- .373/.440/.692 (1.132) (22 HR)
06 away- .280/.333/.485 (.819) (12 HR)

07 home- .376/.435/.722 (1.157) (25 HR)
07 away- .301/.374/.485 (.860) (11 HR)

08 home- .332/.413/.584 (.997) (15 HR)
08 away- .308/.405/.486 (.892) (10 HR)

Career home- .352/.420/.634 (1.054) (88 HR)
Career away- .282/.351/.457 (.808) (44 HR)

Uhh, yeah. SLIGHTY SUSPICIOUS

In a neutral park, which half of those numbers is he more likely to come close to? I think it's pretty obvious, assuming you know what numbers are.

The good news is that his road numbers have gotten progressively better each year. I think he can probably ne like a .900 OPS guy in a neutral park right now. Is he a really good hitter? Probably. You can take into account the fact that many hitters hit better at home too. The point is, when there are GIGANTIC splits EVERY single year of his career, it is extremely obvious that his numbers are greatly influenced by that park. I think this is common sense. I didn't think people still fell for Coors numbers, even after the humidor.

Like I said, I'm not acting like Holliday isn't a very good hitter or that he's not a big middle of the order bat. He probably is. But is he the .980-1.000ish OPS guy that he's been over the last 3 years? Doubtful, unless you want to pretend like Coors didn't help his numbers at all.

The problem is, he's going to be THE big bat on the market. Teams are going to be competing for him, and the team that gets him is probably going to pay like he's a 1.000 OPS guy, when really he's probably like a .900 OPS guy.

So before you respond with something that implies that I'm saying Holliday isn't good or that Coors is the only reason he's good, please read my entire post. Never have I said Holliday isn't a good hitter. I just think it would be stupid to not realize he's not as good as he's been the past few years.

All I'm saying is that Coors made him look like Manny Ramirez, when really he's probably more like Jason Bay (pre-2009 Jason Bay, that is).

Awesome work. So are his road splits his true talent or not?

17 Seconds · June 7, 2009

There's no way to know, but they're obviously a lot closer to being true than his ridiculous Coors numbers.

sneakypower · June 7, 2009

p.s. your sig doesnt make him look dumb. it makes you look dumb for wasting your time in fantasy leagues with morons. congrats.

nobody wanted to join a career OPS fantasy league like i suggested

Matt Holiday?

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blogs