TruffleShuffle

Not a problem... http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers_and_honorees/rules.htm Specifically look at section 5 on voting. If this is the case, shouldn't we throw a-holes and flagrant racists like Tie Cobb and Cap Anson out of the Hall?

I was not around last week, but I would just like to state that this might be the most mind-boggling contract I have ever seen in major league baseball.

3 years would be a really good length for a contract. Schmidt's elbow issues and being run into the ground by Alou make me concerned that Schmidt won't be a good pitcher at age 40. But a contract that runs through age 36 - that I'd be fine with.

Do you mean besides the much higher ops in a much tougher hitters era? Besides all the top 10 MVP finishes and all-star games? The MVP finishes don't really tell me a whole lot other than the fact that the media absolutely loved the guy for his "hustleness". He did hit for a little more power than Pierre, but also didn't have any speed. And it's not like he was a huge powerhouse, either. He was an average defender at multiple positions, but didn't play any of the real skill positions notably well. Basically, he's famous for getting a lot of singles per year (like Pierre), being durable (like Pierre) and for playing a really, really, really long time. Oh yeah, and hustling and playing the game "right". Other than gambling on it, of course. And putting himself into a lineup at the detriment to the team just so he could break a record. But yeah, he did things the "right" way. That's true, he did only have a top 10 OBP 11 times in his career, and only ranked in the top 10 of runs created 13 times. That makes him pretty similar to Juan Pierre - well, except that Juan Pierre has never been in the top 10 of his league in OBP or RC.

I think you've got your years mixed up. Oh yeah, I read it as 2006 and 2007. Whoops. I guess it's possible that this team would produce around the level of the 2005 team. I think it'll be a little better, though. Murton's numbers suggest no improvement at all this year, and I think he'll be a little better. I also think Soriano will significantly outperform the 265/327/498 line projected for him.

It doesn't work this way. The money made in these guarantee games goes to supporting the athletic department. Here are two important parts of that NYT article: I'm partial to this because I was a swimmer in college, and we obviously didn't generate any revenue. Sports like track, swimming, wrestling, lacrosse and field hockey can often be on the chopping block in schools which don't generate much revenue. At many schools, the profits from the football team are used to support other non-revenue sports. Without these guarantee games, schools like Buffalo and Troy St would probably have to fold some of their non-revenue sports. I think this is a good thing too. Let's face it, Buffalo and ULM probably aren't drawing huge crowds. The big-time BCS programs can easily generate enough revenue in their home games to have top-flight facilities, but a school like Buffalo can't. The money has to come from somewhere, and I'll go out on a limb and guess that the Buffalo boosters aren't chipping in the same amount that boosters at a Texas or a Michigan pour into the program. So, the best way to have good facilities that can attract recruits (not to mention have the money to make recruiting trips) and improve the football team is to play games in which you're making a handsome profit despite going on the road.

strange situation for them. two points either way to the fourth ranked team could mean the difference between a BCS game and the Lampshade Bowl. I wouldn't say it's that bad. Doesn't the SEC #2 automatically play in the Capitol One Bowl? That's the most lucrative non-BCS bowl. Even if I'm wrong on this, assuming that LSU is in the BCS, I can't see Arkansas slipping below any teams other than Auburn and Tennessee (who would go to the Capitol One and the Outback). So then Arkansas would be in the Cotton Bowl, which is still a solid New Year's Day bowl game.

I don't think this is a great offense by any stretch of the imagination, but I fail to see how the 2006 Cubs, if as healthy as you've represented here, could have a worse OPS than the 2005 Cubs. You've replaced Juan Pierre with a far, far better player, and you're not going to have the black hole known as Cedeno in your everyday lineup. Then you've got Lee most days, instead of a bum like Mabry or whoever else the Cubs put there while Lee was out.

He grew up in east-central PA, and even though he went to Stanford, he has played on the East Coast his entire career. I believe he's been on record saying the he has no desire to leave the Northeast.

Well, they play at Virginia this weekend. Virginia is awful. Still, don't you think it's funnier to have Miami playing in the Blue Turf Bowl, or Florida State in the Emerald Bowl, then to have them at home for the bowls?

Chicago is on the west coast of Lake Michigan

Maria Kanelis who now works for WWF. She won some contest and now works for them. I know her and talk to her a few times a year. She is from Ottawa, IL where I live and she is smoking. She won that contest and the WWE kept her around. Do you mind giving me her number? :D :wink: I know she is dating C.M. Punk from ECW. is that like real dating, or one of those fake wrestling relationships?

That'd be fun! Seven Pac-10 teams in bowl games, but I can't see UCLA being the Pac-10's 5th...probably 6th or 7th. obviously they're projecting UCLA to beat ASU and then lose to USC, since they're projecting USC to play in the national championship game. Oregon, if they win this week over Arizona, will guarantee themselves a better record than UCLA (assuming UCLA splits the next two). Oregon State should also do the same with a victory over Tree this weekend. Washington State would have to lose at home to Washington for UCLA to take 5th in the Pac 10, and given how Willingham's team has collapsed, I don't see that happening. Btw, I think this would be a good matchup for UCLA or for any Pac 10 team. F$U is really going in the tank, and there's no way that those players are going to be excited for a bowl game just after Christmas in some obscure bowl game in San Fran. Those players did not commit to Florida State with the expectation of playing in the Emerald Bowl.

I hate Loria. What a turd.

I'm guessing Lee's cost in talent will be higher because he's a lefty and because his contract is so team friendly. good point. I'd be OK with the Cubs trading a bullpen arm, but I really don't want them exchanging a lot of major league talent for other major league talent. The Cubs suck, and need big-league talent coming in and not going out.

Are you joking? Meche isn't even close to being in Jennings league. Jennings has pitched his entire career in Colorado. Last year while pitching in Colorado he had ERA well below 4 (3.78). How many people have done that in Coors? He also has pitched almost 200 innings every year hes been in the bigs. With his good sinker at Wrigley he could be damn good and dependable. Not many, although it should be noted that pitching in Coors isn't as tough as it used to be, now that they've figured out a way to at least cut down on the altitude effect with the use of the humidor. His performance last year was anomolous compared to previous years, but at worst he has still been close to average. I certainly wouldn't be opposed to the Cubs acquiring him.

I'd take Lee. Just as good as Westbrook the last two years, and has a better contract that would keep him on the Cubs for 3 years. He's been around league-average in 2005-2006. Even without improvement (which wouldn't be out of the question, given his age), $5.5-7M is a good price for what he'd give you.

Red Sox will not trade Varitek. I'm pretty sure he's the team captain, and I'm also pretty sure he has a no-trade clause.

I was wondering about that as well. It's the only way I can possibly think of that would make any sense. Even then, I don't like it unless he gets a nice return on Barrett. I don't know why they'd trade Barrett. He's a bargain on his current contract and provides much-needed offense. That said, his bargain status might make him even more attractive, and perhaps he could be used in a deal for a very good hitter or pitcher. But unless the player coming back is a legitimate star, it'd be dumb to deal Barrett.

I'm fairly certain that's what happens. so an upgrade (for PSU) from Alamo Bowl vs. someone like Mizzou or KSU to the Outback Bowl vs. Georgia/Kentucky/Tennessee and an upgrade for Wisconsin to the Capital One Bowl. All assuming that UM/O$U loser gets an at-large bid to a BCS game. O$U and Michigan are going to BCS bowls no matter what. Wisconsin is going to the Capitol One Bowl. If Penn State beats Moo and Purdont beats Indiana, both teams will have three conference losses, and the Outback Bowl will have the option of taking PSU or Purdont. They'll take PSU, because they have a bigger fan base - and it'll be justified since PSU beat the Boilermakers on the road. This means Purdont would go to the Alamo Bowl. BTW, here are the CFN bowl projections this week. They have Penn State facing Auburn.

ohman had pretty good peripherals, if he can get that walk rate down. Wuertz had good peripherals too (good job having him in the minors most of the year, cubs). Novoa's peripherals were mediocre... I think I'd make him one of the odd men out.

Agreed. DeRosa I'm all right with, because he brings these positives: -good defense at a bunch of positions -decent eye (careeer IsoP .058) -coming off two pretty good years, with suggestions that the Rangers hitting coach helped improve his hitting -certainly not OLD, and with players playing well into their 30s, he shouldn't decline a whole lot by age 34 -with him, you have a better idea of what you're getting. Cedeno could improve, Theriot could be all right, but at this point I want to know I'll get decent production. It's possible that Theriot could bomb just as badly as Cedeno, and then you're up crap creek without a paddle. Blanco, I just don't get. $2.5M for a guy who really plays one position (yeah, he can play first, but his bat is lousy for a catcher, do you really want his bat at first base?) He also has a career line of 225/290/367, which is a bit short of spectacular, to put it mildly. Soto could reasonably be expected to hit as well as Blanco in the next two years. And he's 34, which is getting old for a catcher.

btw, I can't find it now, but someone said if we hadn't signed DeRosa, Blanco and traded for Izturis, we could have Lugo and also sign a decent starting pitcher. Yeah, maybe about 5 years ago. Lugo will get close to $10M per year, and nobody is getting a decent starting pitcher for $2-3M per.

It's the "guys who can catch the ball" of 2007. Imagine for a second that the 2007 infielders all produce at their career averages in 2007, unlikely, but not absurd. Lee - 155 games, 123 OPS+ DeRosa - 100 games, 90 OPS+ Izturis - 100 games, 68 OPS+ Ramirez - 140 games, 109 OPS+ Throw in a bad-nutted Michael Barrett - 130 games 91 OPS+, backed up by Blanco - 50 games, 66 OPS+ Man, the pitching better be really really good this year. Hey, while we're doing that, can we also assume that Mark Prior and Kerry Wood will pitch to their career averages? The pitching is looking pretty darn good once we do that.

Carl Pavano is making $10M/year, Chan Ho Park $11M/year, Jaret Wright $8M/year. Still think he's overpriced? And, Moose has made 31, 27, 30 and 32 starts the past four years. He's not fragile whatsoever.