Hahahahaha Johnny Damon

[TheDude]

Sure, it's good to get production better than average for a position, but Damon isn't that much better than the league average to justify that type of length or dollar amount. Brian Roberts was also one of the top hitters in the game in addition for his position. Damon is up there for his position, but relative to other positions he's middle of the road. Plus he'll be 32, plus he's poor defensively, plus he's got his splits working against him for future performance. There aren't a lot of players worth 8 figures in the current market, and Damon isn't one of them.

I think we'll just disagree. Age isn't that important in this case, he isn't poor defensively as claimed, relativity to other positions is inconsequential, and using splits to predict future performance is as meaningful as "clutch".

[goonys evil twin]

Sure, it's good to get production better than average for a position, but Damon isn't that much better than the league average to justify that type of length or dollar amount. Brian Roberts was also one of the top hitters in the game in addition for his position. Damon is up there for his position, but relative to other positions he's middle of the road. Plus he'll be 32, plus he's poor defensively, plus he's got his splits working against him for future performance. There aren't a lot of players worth 8 figures in the current market, and Damon isn't one of them.

I think we'll just disagree. Age isn't that important in this case, he isn't poor defensively as claimed, relativity to other positions is inconsequential, and using splits to predict future performance is as meaningful as "clutch".

 

 

Wait wait wait wait.

 

What splits? I agree that using splits such as "close and late" or "RISP" is pretty meaningless. But home/road splits can be useful, especially for players that play in odd ballparks. For instance, everybody that looked at JB's overall 2004 numbers and expected something similar in 2005 were disappointed, while those that looked at his road splits got what they expected.

[Jimy is a misspell]

Is this really a shock? Aren't most older ball players overpaid when they get long in the tooth, b/c of what the did when they were younger? That's the nature of the game.

[goonys evil twin]

Is this really a shock? Aren't most older ball players overpaid when they get long in the tooth, b/c of what the did when they were younger? That's the nature of the game.

 

And it's the in the Cubs nature to go after the toothiest.

[UBlink]

Is this really a shock? Aren't most older ball players overpaid when they get long in the tooth, b/c of what the did when they were younger? That's the nature of the game.

 

And it's the in the Cubs nature to go after the toothiest.

 

Toothé

[snoodmonger]

lololol is there anyone in the world that would pay money just to see Johnny Damon? MAYBE Bill Simmons.

 

LOL. That's funny.

[BOJI BOB]

With all that has been said about Damon, he does kind of fit into the mold of the type of players Dusty likes, a "proven" veteran on the downhill (albeit slightly) slide. I'm surprised with Dusty's penchant for these types of players that someone like Shannon Stewart's name hasn't popped up more :D

[series65cubsfan]

With all that has been said about Damon, he does kind of fit into the mold of the type of players Dusty likes, a "proven" veteran on the downhill (albeit slightly) slide. I'm surprised with Dusty's penchant for these types of players that someone like Shannon Stewart's name hasn't popped up more :D

 

No doubt. A scary thought. Welcome to the board!

[ManCrushOnNomar]

I really want Johnny Damon on the Cubs for personal reasons. My fiance is from St. Louis and a huge Cardinals fan. She swore that she would completely hop the fence and become a full time Cubs fan if we get Johnny.

[series65cubsfan]

I really want Johnny Damon on the Cubs for personal reasons. My fiance is from St. Louis and a huge Cardinals fan. She swore that she would completely hop the fence and become a full time Cubs fan if we get Johnny.

 

And that's a darn good reason! If my fiance would only get into the Cubs, it would bed so nice. She a Dodger fan so wouldn't be as gratifying as turning a Card fan but nevertheless...

Edited October 12, 2005 by series65cubsfan

[Andy]

I really want Johnny Damon on the Cubs for personal reasons. My fiance is from St. Louis and a huge Cardinals fan. She swore that she would completely hop the fence and become a full time Cubs fan if we get Johnny.

How big a Cards fan can you be if you would dump them for the Cubs just because the Cubbies get an overrated overpaid center fielder?

[ManCrushOnNomar]

I really want Johnny Damon on the Cubs for personal reasons. My fiance is from St. Louis and a huge Cardinals fan. She swore that she would completely hop the fence and become a full time Cubs fan if we get Johnny.

How big a Cards fan can you be if you would dump them for the Cubs just because the Cubbies get an overrated overpaid center fielder?

One who's in love with Captain Caveman, obviously. And it isn't just that, I've been slowly getting her converted, but she said that that one signing would make it final.

[nilodnayr]

Also no one has mentioned that signing Damon for 5 years means Pie is blocked and wed have to either move one to a corner or try to dish one of them.

[bhogg]

I really want Johnny Damon on the Cubs for personal reasons. My fiance is from St. Louis and a huge Cardinals fan. She swore that she would completely hop the fence and become a full time Cubs fan if we get Johnny.

 

And that's a darn good reason! If my fiance would only get into the Cubs, it would bed so nice. She a Dodger fan so wouldn't be as gratifying as turning a Card fan but nevertheless...

 

 

freudian slippage?[/b]

[series65cubsfan]

:oops: and I never really believed in Fruedian slips either. O:)

[RynoRules]

Also no one has mentioned that signing Damon for 5 years means Pie is blocked and wed have to either move one to a corner or try to dish one of them.

 

That's the first point made against signing Damon that I really agree with.

 

I find it contradictory that some of the same folks who would sign 35-year old Brian Giles to a 4 or 5 year deal are balking at signing Damon (at least in part) due to the fact that he's 32 and wants 5 years.

[XZero771679666304]

Also no one has mentioned that signing Damon for 5 years means Pie is blocked and wed have to either move one to a corner or try to dish one of them.

 

That's the first point made against signing Damon that I really agree with.

 

I find it contradictory that some of the same folks who would sign 35-year old Brian Giles to a 4 or 5 year deal are balking at signing Damon (at least in part) due to the fact that he's 32 and wants 5 years.

 

I could be wrong, but I don't remember too many people wanting Giles signed for anything beyond 3 years, if that. And Giles has been far more consistent over the past several years than Damon has, and more productive. With the Cubs likely to target Furcal, Giles makes more sense, but at 2-3 years.

 

I'd alsolike to point out that Giles has had a significantly higher OBP and OPS, and scored 90+ runs in the middle of an anemic offense. Giles also had nealy as many SB as Damon this year. One could make a strong argument that Giles could have done a better job as a leadoff man than Damon on top of that juggernaut Boston offense.

 

Now Giles isn't a leadoff man, but even at his age he brings more to the table than Damon.

[USSoccer]

Whoever signs Damon is going to have an awful baseball player on their hands by 2008 at the latest.

 

And for the record, Giles at 4 years is a better investment than Damon at 5. Aside from the fact that Damon blocks Pie, Giles is a better player in nearly every phase of the game. More power. Nearly equal speed. Better patience. Better defense relative to their position. Much better throwing arm.

[Careless]

I really want Johnny Damon on the Cubs for personal reasons. My fiance is from St. Louis and a huge Cardinals fan. She swore that she would completely hop the fence and become a full time Cubs fan if we get Johnny.

 

And that's a darn good reason! If my fiance would only get into the Cubs, it would bed so nice. She a Dodger fan so wouldn't be as gratifying as turning a Card fan but nevertheless...

 

 

freudian slippage?[/b]

i had more fun thinking about the fact that they both used the masculine "fiance" instead of the feminine "fiancee".

[JGalt73]

FWIW, here is PECOTAs projection for '06-09 for Damon and Giles

 

Damon, CF

2006 25.5 VORP; 5.7 WARP; .284 EQA

2007 23.4 VORP; 5.1 WARP; .284 EQA

2008 16.8 VORP; 4.0 WARP; .279 EQA

2009 14.1 VORP; 3.0 WARP; .279 EQA

 

Giles, RF

2006 31.6 VORP; 5.0 WARP; .310 EQA

2007 26.6 VORP; 4.0 WARP; .312 EQA

2008 18.0 VORP; 3.1 WARP; .305 EQA

2009 10.6 VORP; 1.6 WARP; .299 EQA

 

Damon is advantaged by his age (and the predicted precipitous decline of Giles). Damon also outstrips Giles in defensive wins. VORP and WARP are position dependent, so these are not exact comparisons - corner OF's are held to a higher offensive standard.

[nilodnayr]

FWIW, here is PECOTAs projection for '06-09 for Damon and Giles

 

Damon, CF

2006 25.5 VORP; 5.7 WARP; .284 EQA

2007 23.4 VORP; 5.1 WARP; .284 EQA

2008 16.8 VORP; 4.0 WARP; .279 EQA

2009 14.1 VORP; 3.0 WARP; .279 EQA

 

Giles, RF

2006 31.6 VORP; 5.0 WARP; .310 EQA

2007 26.6 VORP; 4.0 WARP; .312 EQA

2008 18.0 VORP; 3.1 WARP; .305 EQA

2009 10.6 VORP; 1.6 WARP; .299 EQA

 

Damon is advantaged by his age (and the predicted precipitous decline of Giles). Damon also outstrips Giles in defensive wins. VORP and WARP are position dependent, so these are not exact comparisons - corner OF's are held to a higher offensive standard.

 

Do they do predicitons for 2010? Because to compare the two it should really be Giles 3 years projections vs Damons 5 year.

[RynoRules]

Let me be more clear - I acknowledge that Giles has been mor eproductive than Damon. But one of the arguments that has been made for not signing Damon is that he is 32 and wants a 5-year deal. Giles is 35 and I have read on several occassions on this bd. that many would be willing to sign him to a 4-year deal.

 

Thus, if you don't want Damon b/c of his age, but you want Giles in spite of his age, that appears to be contradictory. Its not a big deal, but if you don't want Damon and you are okay with Giles, I think you are better off sticking with the batting statistics as a justification.

[goonys evil twin]

Let me be more clear - I acknowledge that Giles has been mor eproductive than Damon. But one of the arguments that has been made for not signing Damon is that he is 32 and wants a 5-year deal. Giles is 35 and I have read on several occassions on this bd. that many would be willing to sign him to a 4-year deal.

 

Thus, if you don't want Damon b/c of his age, but you want Giles in spite of his age, that appears to be contradictory. Its not a big deal, but if you don't want Damon and you are okay with Giles, I think you are better off sticking with the batting statistics as a justification.

 

Age isn't the reason I don't want Damon. Although it plays a part. Damon's game is based largely on speed, and speed is a young man's game. Giles OBP/SLG game is much more adaptable to an aging body.

 

But the main reason I would want Giles more than Damon is Giles blows him away in the production department.

[JC]

Let me be more clear - I acknowledge that Giles has been mor eproductive than Damon. But one of the arguments that has been made for not signing Damon is that he is 32 and wants a 5-year deal. Giles is 35 and I have read on several occassions on this bd. that many would be willing to sign him to a 4-year deal.

 

Thus, if you don't want Damon b/c of his age, but you want Giles in spite of his age, that appears to be contradictory. Its not a big deal, but if you don't want Damon and you are okay with Giles, I think you are better off sticking with the batting statistics as a justification.

 

Age isn't the reason I don't want Damon. Although it plays a part. Damon's game is based largely on speed, and speed is a young man's game. Giles OBP/SLG game is much more adaptable to an aging body.

 

But the main reason I would want Giles more than Damon is Giles blows him away in the production department.

 

Absolutely. Further, why create a potential block in CF when it is one of the few prospect replacement positions the Cubs have? With upgrades at the corners (which would include a full season of Murton, at least) and retaining Nomar's offensive bat, Corey is fine for a year to see if he can straighten himself out.

 

Of course, this is an impossibility because Baker and Hendry see the need for a speedy leadoff guy. Hence, they will target Damon, or Furcal, or Castillo, or Pierre, etc. None of which make the most sense considering what the Cubs have largely at their disposal vs. their defficiencies (Nomar, Cedeno, Patterson, Pie).

 

That said, Damon's ridiculously weak OF arm is a detractor as well. Its just awful. By the end of a four year contract, he will likely have more juice on the ball if he tosses it underhand.

[TheDude]

Let me be more clear - I acknowledge that Giles has been mor eproductive than Damon. But one of the arguments that has been made for not signing Damon is that he is 32 and wants a 5-year deal. Giles is 35 and I have read on several occassions on this bd. that many would be willing to sign him to a 4-year deal.

 

Thus, if you don't want Damon b/c of his age, but you want Giles in spite of his age, that appears to be contradictory. Its not a big deal, but if you don't want Damon and you are okay with Giles, I think you are better off sticking with the batting statistics as a justification.

 

Age isn't the reason I don't want Damon. Although it plays a part. Damon's game is based largely on speed, and speed is a young man's game. Giles OBP/SLG game is much more adaptable to an aging body.

 

But the main reason I would want Giles more than Damon is Giles blows him away in the production department.

But this isn't a fair comparison. They don't play the same position (meaning there is not a competition for one or other and they are not mutually exclusive) and they don't bring any of the same values to the table.

 

For production, compare Giles to another outfielder that produces. Damon is a leadoff hitter, what type of production are you expecting? As a leadoff hitter, he brings hits, OBP, respectable speed, and runs. He has scored 100+ runs per season for 8 consecutive years.

 

Honestly, I don't see why Giles and Damon are compared for production. They represent two seperate needs for the Cubs (a leadoff hitter and 4/5 hole hitter, CF and RF) and they represent the top FA for their services at each respective position.