CubinNY

Bases allowed, SLG, OPS against, and OBP against are more than the sum of their parts. In other words, their probably isn't a direct correlation between the those data and runs allowed. However, if we just look at OBP against I think one could make a case for the runs allowed to be right where it should be. We also have to look a the differences between the bottom 1/3 of the teams. I would be willing to bet that the difference in the numbers between whomever is in 10th and the Cubs is pretty small.

I think you are misunderstanding. BAA, OBP, and SLG with RISP is an extremely important statistic in scoring runs. The problem with using the statistic to evaluate players is that its not repeatable. That is, most players who hit great with RISP one year, won't repeat that performance the next year. Thus, there is no sense trying to find players who do well with RISP. When you get your hits is very important in how many runs you score. Because this element involves so much luck, the importance of having more runners on base is even more exaggerated. Teams with fewer baserunners have few opportunities to get lucky - score on errors, etc. Right on. It's not that BA/RISP is unimportant it is that it has little predictive value when judging future performance. The value of any stat is how stable the stat is over time.

Yeah, I sort of hijacked the thread. However, I don't think you'll find factual evidence that AVG with RISP is the reason teams score more runs than other teams. While some players on a team may do better in those situations, there will likely be guys who do worse in those situations on that same team. The way to truly improve runs scored is to increase your OBP, which gives guys (good or bad at AVG with RISP) more opportunities to drive in runs. The same can be said for the info TheDude is requesting. Just in reverse. A team that has the better WHIP will likely give up less runs than teams that have a much higher WHIP. It's tough to gather the information he requests. The Cubs have been very good as a team in not giving up hits. But, walks can be just as damaging and they are horrible when it comes to allowing baserunners. I don't really think it correlates to AVG with RISP as much as it correlates to OBP in relation to runs scored. WHIP ia a hugely important stat for a pitcher. So is wins, and BAA Wins are almost meaningless unless a pitcher completes the vast majority of his starts. BAA will show up in WHIP, although if a pitcher doesn't walk very many batters he could have a high BAA and respectable WHIP.

Yeah, I sort of hijacked the thread. However, I don't think you'll find factual evidence that AVG with RISP is the reason teams score more runs than other teams. While some players on a team may do better in those situations, there will likely be guys who do worse in those situations on that same team. The way to truly improve runs scored is to increase your OBP, which gives guys (good or bad at AVG with RISP) more opportunities to drive in runs. The same can be said for the info TheDude is requesting. Just in reverse. A team that has the better WHIP will likely give up less runs than teams that have a much higher WHIP. It's tough to gather the information he requests. The Cubs have been very good as a team in not giving up hits. But, walks can be just as damaging and they are horrible when it comes to allowing baserunners. I don't really think it correlates to AVG with RISP as much as it correlates to OBP in relation to runs scored. WHIP ia a hugely important stat for a pitcher.

I think his main problem is confidence, not unlike Rich Hill earlier this year. Guzman has nasty stuff. Let's hope he can put it together next season. Confidence is not a problem, throwing strikes is the problem; or rather not throwing them. Confidence is an outcome, not a cause. Guzman has struggled not becuase of what is between his ears, same with Hill. If you talk to any coach, they will tell you that a player's performance is directly impacted by how confident they are in what they are doing. Can confidence be impacted by good execution and good performance? Of course. But confidence can also be created, generated in a player's mind and it can enable a player to perform at their peak. Michael Jordan was a supremely confident performer at the end of a game. He wanted the ball. Yet he still had several failures at converting a game winning shot. The thing that he did was mentally relive the times when he was successful during the timeout before taking the court to hit the game winning shot. He believes, and I agree with him, that he was more successful because of his mental preparation. I agree that Guzman's struggles are probably mostly due to the fact that it takes an extended period of pitching without interruption to have the control necessary to succeed at the higher levels and he hasn't had that because of recent injuries. But the same is not true for Hill. Hill has had extended periods of healthy and success and the higher levels. But he wasn't performing well at the major league level. The mere fact that he went from sucking to performing at a Cy Young level is evidence that his problem was mental in origin. According to everyone who has first hand knowledge of Hill success, the origin of his major league struggles was completely mental. His lack of confidence in the majors affected his ability to execute pitches. He simply had to give himself the freedom to be himself and do what he was doing with such regularity at the AAA level. His extended period of success there made it easy for his muscles to remember what they were doing at Iowa and do the same thing with Chicago. It also made it easier for Rich to generate the confidence necessary to go from a terrible first outing in July against the Cardinals to a great one his next time out. And any coach that said that would be full of rah, rah, BS.

I don't care if he is a control freak. I do care if in the 5th inning he bunts with the 7th place hitter in the line up and a guy on 1st though. I do care if he doesn't pay attention to things like walks taken and walks given. I do care if he uses convential wisdom to guide his judgment when the conventional wisdom is wrong. I don't know enough about Giradi to form a conclusion yet, but the information I do have suggests to me that he may not be what I want. The Marlins are winning on talent. I think most teams win on talent. I don't think the manager has much of an effect over the course of the season, but as we have learned even a handfull of games can be important.

And they both could be true.

Evan Bayh, Democrat from Indiana. He's smart, he's a moderate, he's young and goodlooking. I really, really, really hope Hilary Clinton doesn't win the Democratic nomination.

I think his main problem is confidence, not unlike Rich Hill earlier this year. Guzman has nasty stuff. Let's hope he can put it together next season. Confidence is not a problem, throwing strikes is the problem; or rather not throwing them. Confidence is an outcome, not a cause. Guzman has struggled not becuase of what is between his ears, same with Hill.

Five will get you ten that Hendry trades Murton for someone with the profile of Jeff Francoeur.

Don't you mean Mobile? Birmingham has been with the White Sox for quite a while. Um, yep I do. At least I got the right state. :D Actually I think you mean Montgomery. Mobile is with San Diego. The biscuts have been wildly successful. My wife's family lives close by and I've been to several games. The amount of support they get is nothing short of amazing. However, they do a lot to draw the fans to the game as well. There is a lot of entertainment for the kids. The food is great and the seats are all good. The contrast to the D-Jaxx game I went to are shocking.

Actually white sox fans and ND fans are in the same family The "I am sick of hearing them" family The words are different but the noise serves the same function. It is annoying If it's not whining about the Cubs from WS fans. It's whining about the schedule from ND fans. If it's not Maglio is better than Sammy from the WS fans. It's we could have had Randy Moss but we're too good from ND fans. It's all functionally equivalent. I can't wait until Weis leaves and ND becomes another mid major with a little history, just like Army. The WS are on their way down now.

Is this b/c of the long season he just played or do teams do this for most 1st year players?

I don't think it's that, though. He put up pretty darn good power numbers and his LD% is fairly reasonable. What most people have been criticizing him for is his lack of patience, which tends to be something that works across aluminum and wood bats. I wonder what his coaches told him they wanted to see out of him. I wouldn't at all be surprised if they told him some crap like they wanted him swinging the bat alot, being more aggressive at the plate than normal in order to quickly adjust from aluminum to wood. Either way, I'm not impressed with his showing, but, like I said, I'm waiting until after next season to declare him a good or bad pick. I'd wait longer than next year before declaring him anything, but my early impression remains skeptical, and will until he improves significantly. Oh, and you are probably dead on as far as what he's being instructed to do by the Cubs. I will remain skeptical too, probably more than most as I think the pick was terrible. Nevertheless, I am awaiting where he will go to for the winter leagues. I hope he goes to Mexico where he will see a lot of junk ball pitchers.

Dusty is really showing how much he wants it. Frankly, I am shocked he is still putting Murton out there every three days a week. Pagan is the man to take them all the way to the top. Watch out KC we're coming for you.

ugh Just say no to Joe!

Beltran is a difference maker, instead we ended up with Burnitz. Hendry and his lack of foresight. I so wanted Beltran when he was on the market. Here was a player who is entering his prime and would likely produce throuhout the length of his contract. Going into 2005 Patterson was no sure thing, as we found out. Besides think about the defense.... Patterson in RF and Beltran in CF. Oh well, now we have JJ and will likely have Pierre for another two years. The Jones and Pierre signings aside, after 2004 was Beltran worth $17M/year when he had a career high OPS+ of 136? As great as his 2006 season has been, he and Boras were leveraging his incredible 2004 postseason to get completely overpaid, at the time, by the Mets. What you are saying is all correct, but Beltran will produce and be over paid.

Beltran is a difference maker, instead we ended up with Burnitz. Hendry and his lack of foresight. I so wanted Beltran when he was on the market. Here was a player who is entering his prime and would likely produce throuhout the length of his contract. Going into 2005 Patterson was no sure thing, as we found out. Besides think about the defense.... Patterson in RF and Beltran in CF. Oh well, now we have JJ and will likely have Pierre for another two years.

As I said every player's different. It's not my theory either. I'm just saying what Todd Walker has said. Maybe Todd Walker is the only baseball player who feels this way, I don't know. Maybe Todd Walkers was just making stuff up? Maybe he was asked a stupid question and started to theorize. Let's get this back to Hill. Maybe he is more comfortable pitching in the bigs. Maybe that's why is better. Maybe all his problems are psychological. It could be true. However, I highly doubt it. In life there is a learning curve for every organism. The learning can only take place from experience. Rich Hill started off terrible and wasn't given enough time to show what he could do before being yanked around by the brain trust. Now you are saying he has done ok with no pressure, when in fact you have no idea how much pressure he's been pitching under since being called up. Neither do I. But knowing what I know about behaivor, I'd say it was quite a bit. Dusty and Hendry both basically said, "It's time to put out and produce or you won't get another shot" the last time he came back.

Are you freaking kidding? After his poor start of the season, demotion to the bullpen, and demotion to AAA, every start is a pressure situation. Pressure is an individual phenomenon not a team or group one. When I am golfing and am lining up a 4 foot put for par, with no money on the line, no crowd, and just my friends watching is one of the biggest pressure situation I face on a weekly basis. I don't agree with you. Even if he failed this time around he would've gotten serveral more shots at the bigs because of his stats in the minors. Todd Walker once said it's easy to play for smaller market teams that draw no fans because there is no pressure. Playing for Boston and NY is far more pressure, where you are expected to excel from day 1 and expected to win. I don't know how to respond other than asking you about when you feel pressure. Is it becuase of the situation or becuase of what others say about the situation? BTW- I would think that pitching in Wrigley in front of a packed house, for a manager and GM who haven't exactly "had his back" is a pretty big pressure situation. How much pressure do you think Anibel Sanchez had last night when he was pitching in front of 30,000 empty seats?

--Joe Paterno =D> =D> =D> Go Penn State! Go Big Ten! Nothing would make me happier then to see ND go 0-for-the Big Ten. It will show everyone the REAL reason why they didn't want to join.

Wise non-move. Let Stub Hub et al. take care of that stuff.

Are you freaking kidding? After his poor start of the season, demotion to the bullpen, and demotion to AAA, every start is a pressure situation. Pressure is an individual phenomenon not a team or group one. When I am golfing and am lining up a 4 foot put for par, with no money on the line, no crowd, and just my friends watching is one of the biggest pressure situation I face on a weekly basis.

Agreed. The only exception that I can think of is Marino Rivera who still pitches two innings on some occasions.

The point is that Dempster has contributed very very little this year, despite having 24 saves. I'll also add that even successful closers are overvalued and overpaid, and when closers are less than totally successful they are absolutely hideous in terms of bang for the buck. How many closers on a .400 team do? Seriously. Mike Gonzalez is a talented young arm who gets little attention and has little value in Pittsburg, but that doesn't mean he isn't worth keeping in the closers role. Closers only have value on winning teams anyway, which is why I don't understand the thread. It seems to me you're beating up on a guy just because his team has been terrible. You are missing the point. The save stat is useless. It doesn't matter if Dempster was on a winning team or not. Simply giving the pitcher who pitched last in a close game a save is stupid.