jjgman21

what is your point? how about this Lee 04 OPS 125, IsoD 61 05 OPS 110, IsoD 59 06 OPS 125, IsoD 55 Soriano 04 OPS 98, IsoD 44 05 OPS 110, IsoD 41 06 OPS 135, IsoD 74 (go ahead and take away the IBBs, it's still a vast improvement in an area Lee is getting worse at) not sure why K/BB ratio is in the discussion. we're not talking about pitchers and I thought the general view was strikeouts are not a strong consideration amongst those with the sabr mindset.

The Brewers payroll is expected to expand to $60 Million this year. After this next season they have Jenkins ($8M), Brady Clark (3.8M) and Cordero ($5M) off the books. They are still years away from paying Prince or Weeks. They can let Doug Davis go because they have Gallardo, Inman, and Rodgers coming up in the next year. They also have Koskie coming off the books after 07 with Ryan Braun taking over 3B. I expect to hear about multi-year extensions for Hall and Capuano before Opening Day. In 08 the Brewers will look something like this: C- Rivera? 1B Fielder 2B Weeks SS Hardy 3B Braun LF Hall CF ??? RF Corey Hart SP Sheets, Capuano, Bush, Villenueva, Gallardo (Inman/Rodgers) That is a high potential team, and cheap enough for them to afford. Now in about 4-5 years they will have no chance at affording that team. Bill Hall is only in his 1st year of arby. There would be no reason for them to trade their cleanup hitter at this point for salary purposes. He will probably get no more than $5 Million in 07. Now, for the right package, I think Ben Sheets could be quite available. a good breakdown, but I think you miss the fact that as these years roll by, Weeks, Hardy, Fielder, et al start becoming arbitration eligible while Ben Sheets is taking up 1/5 of the teams salary. you can't just dismiss it as 'they are years away from having to be paid.' seems to me they will be squeezing the salary weenie balloon. Cordero comes off, but they have to pay Capuano. Clark comes off but they have to pay Hardy. Jenkins comes off but they have to pay Weeks. 5 million is quite significant when Sheets, Jenkins, and Cordero are taking up more than one third of the teams 60M salary. not saying you are wrong, just trying to hash this whole thing out.

yawn. good luck in the Brillo Pad, Squeegie, Sponge, and Pine Cone Bowls. edit - actually, I would love to see it. OSU v. Louisville Michigan v. WV Rutgers v. UW South Florida v. Purdue Cincinnati v. Penn State Pitt v. Iowa UConn v. Minnesota worst case scenerio, Big Ten wins five, probably six, more than likely they sweep all seven.

If the Big East teams get beat in the bowl games I will not be making excuses and I would expect you to do the same if the Big East wins. Your complete and total hatred of the Big East is clearly clouding your judgement of the conference and because of this your opinion is EXTREMELY biased. My point of view comes from actually watching the games on the field. I'm not from the east coast and have no ties to any schools out there. I also don't have any ties to any west coast schools seeing as UC Davis is DI-AA. The only team I dislike is Notre Dame but I have the ability to analyze their situation with an unbiased perspective. I think that Louisville and West Virginia are good teams based on what I have seen on the field. I am not the only person who holds this belief. Like I said, if the Big East loses their bowl games, I won't make excuses unless they are justified (i.e. referee screwjob a la Oklahoma-Oregon). I would expect you to admit you are wrong if the Big East wins their games but I know you won't so that effort is futile. The same goes for Wisconsin. After this, I'm done debating you on this topic because of your extreme bias. Get an unbiased point of view and then we'll talk. I had absolutely no opinion of the Big East conference until Cuse, backed by you, kept dominating every single college football thread whining about them being shown no respect. you have noone to blame for these conversations other than Cuse and yourself. WVU and Louisville are good teams. I never said the weren't. but the notion that they could play with the power teams in the power conferences or should be considered for a shot at the national title is absurd, and I think deep down you know that. the fact that two of them are rated in the top 10 is also absurd, because I think deep down you both know that the rankings are based mostly on incumbancy, and with no teams other than each other (and the improved Rutgers team) on the schedule with even a ray of hope to beat them, they will remain highly rated in both polls. your accusation of bias, similarly absurd. I guess they guy who has his schools nickname in his username is on the up and up and completely unbiased. the Big East used to be a fine conference, but they just lost their three top teams. you want to paint calling a spade a spade as biased, be my guest.

you don't get it. Louisville is the same team, just in a crap conference that still has a BCS tie in even though it shouldn't. the fact that they are a National Title contender is a black eye on the system, not a chip in favor of Louisville. further, the point was more addressed to showing that the top team in the Big East is behind the 3-5 teams in the Big Ten in terms of how good the programs are, not a testament to this year. all your glorification of Louisville's program pretty much goes down the drain when they can't beat crap teams in crap bowls. sure, they are a good team that is probably improving, but they still have a ways to go to be considered in the same breath as the second tier schools in the good conferences. I don't know how many ways it has to be explained and demonstrated to you and Cuse. all you guys have is your opinions and seven degrees from Kevin Bacon to make your point. I guess we'll just have to wait until bowl season when all three Big East teams get thumped by lower ranked teams, at which point I'm sure you'll just come and make excuses. So the fact that the Big East has the second rated conference in the Sagarin Ratings means nothing to you? not a bit since the Sagarin Ratings have always overemphasized point differential which always favors offensively dominated teams.

you don't get it. Louisville is the same team, just in a crap conference that still has a BCS tie in even though it shouldn't. the fact that they are a National Title contender is a black eye on the system, not a chip in favor of Louisville. further, the point was more addressed to showing that the top team in the Big East is behind the 3-5 teams in the Big Ten in terms of how good the programs are, not a testament to this year. all your glorification of Louisville's program pretty much goes down the drain when they can't beat crap teams in crap bowls. sure, they are a good team that is probably improving, but they still have a ways to go to be considered in the same breath as the second tier schools in the good conferences. I don't know how many ways it has to be explained and demonstrated to you and Cuse. all you guys have is your opinions and seven degrees from Kevin Bacon to make your point. I guess we'll just have to wait until bowl season when all three Big East teams get thumped by lower ranked teams, at which point I'm sure you'll just come and make excuses.

I think you have to consider the overall situation that the Brewers are in before concluding it would take Rich Hill. they finally gained a measure of respectability with their young players coming up, but are still playing a numbers game when it comes to payroll. in other words, they are still a small market team that has to play the small market game. they shed little salary this year with players leaving, while at the same time have to pay arbitration numbers for several of their top players instead of league minimum and if I am not mistaken they have to pay escalating salaries for Jenkins and Sheets. I don't think it necessarily takes Rich Hill.

That's how I feel. Aside from Lee being healthy and addition by subtraction in regards to Pierre, this offense really isn't that much better. I'd expect both Jones and Soriano to regress with Soriano putting up 2006 Jones-esque numbers from last year (and keep in mind he'll be doing that in the leadoff spot, not with Lee and Ramirez in front of him) and Jones putting up numbers closer to his final two years with the Twins. And then you have the middle of the infield. A lot of things will have to go right with the pitching staff this year. this sort of thinking drives me nuts. assume regression by everyone to come to the conclusion that everything will be a complete disaster. I understand the need to view things from a worst case scenerio point of view, but come on. the return of Lee, swap of Soriano for Pierre, more Barrett less Blanco, second will be vastly improved with the exception of the September production the Cubs got from Theriot, progression by Murton that was amply demonstrated in the second half, and you have to assume that Aram will not have the horrendous bad luck he had in April and May 06. this offense will be vastly improved over 2006. Regression for Jones and Soriano doesn't seem to be too unlikely. Jacque Jones (32): 2003 - .304 .333 .464 .797 2004 - .254 .315 .427 .742 2005 - .249 .319 .438 .757 2006 - .285 .334 .499 .833 Alfonso Soriano (31) 2003 - .290 .338 .525 .863 2004 - .280 .324 .484 .808 2005 - .268 .309 .512 .821 2006 - .277 .351 .560 .911 They both had either a career year or close to a career year on the wrong side of 30. I don't think it's safe to assume that they can easily repeat those seasons. Same thing with DeRosa (32). see the calculation I ran for the Cubs projected lineup which used three year splits, aka assumes regression.

another quick rule of thumb Anytime you take what a baseball GM or any high ranking corporate official says to a reporter as truth as to what he is thinking, you are the one that is dumb. I might not have said it that way, but this is definitely true. The only real evidence as to what a GM's philosophy is is the team he puts on the field. There's plenty of evidence of Hendry screwing up there without going to quotes. oh, I don't completely disagree with that notion, but I still hold out a shred of hope that Hendry put the team that his manager wanted on the field. I also don't think Hendry has nearly enough respect for OBP or the walk in particular. although I didn't want Lou, putting a no-nonsense manager and the A's hitting coach on the bench shows some progress to that end.

That's how I feel. Aside from Lee being healthy and addition by subtraction in regards to Pierre, this offense really isn't that much better. I'd expect both Jones and Soriano to regress with Soriano putting up 2006 Jones-esque numbers from last year (and keep in mind he'll be doing that in the leadoff spot, not with Lee and Ramirez in front of him) and Jones putting up numbers closer to his final two years with the Twins. And then you have the middle of the infield. A lot of things will have to go right with the pitching staff this year. this sort of thinking drives me nuts. assume regression by everyone to come to the conclusion that everything will be a complete disaster. I understand the need to view things from a worst case scenerio point of view, but come on. the return of Lee, swap of Soriano for Pierre, more Barrett less Blanco, second will be vastly improved with the exception of the September production the Cubs got from Theriot, progression by Murton that was amply demonstrated in the second half, and you have to assume that Aram will not have the horrendous bad luck he had in April and May 06. this offense will be vastly improved over 2006.

what do you guys think it would take to get him from the Brewers as he enters his arbitration years? his steadily increasing IsoD and power would make driving in runs with one's glove completely irrelevant, and he may be a player without a position on the Brewers.

ZERO EMPATHY FOR IMB!! being a Sooner fan was a bad decision and their players and coaches made bad decisions during that game. That still doesn't change the fact that the refs screwed up and Oklahoma should have been awarded possession on the onsides kick. doesn't matter. they made bad decisions to be in a position to have Oregon beat them. Oregon made good decisions and therefore won the game. the actual circumstances of these things just don't matter. just ask IMB himself. unless of course he has double standards. You could say Oklahoma did plenty to lose that game, but what did Oregon do to win that game aside from just barely capitalizing on some horrible, horrible officiating the last half of the fourth quarter? It's usually easy to win a close game when the refs hand the game to you on a silver platter, but Oregon still had to sweat it out. I'm speaking tongue in cheek in reference to a different thread. of course Oklahoma should have that game in their win column.

here's to hoping Garner keeps putting two of his worst OBP guys in front of the middle of the order.

another quick rule of thumb Anytime you take what a baseball GM or any high ranking corporate official says to a reporter as truth as to what he is thinking, you are the one that is dumb.

ZERO EMPATHY FOR IMB!! being a Sooner fan was a bad decision and their players and coaches made bad decisions during that game. That still doesn't change the fact that the refs screwed up and Oklahoma should have been awarded possession on the onsides kick. doesn't matter. they made bad decisions to be in a position to have Oregon beat them. Oregon made good decisions and therefore won the game. the actual circumstances of these things just don't matter. just ask IMB himself. unless of course he has double standards.

even if it was somehow Wisconsin's fault for not playing OSU, doesn't the blame for the week schedule go at least in part to Iowa and Penn State? it's not the Badgers fault that the pre-season 16 and 19 ranked team in the country fell on their faces this year.

this is comical. in any given year the Big East would be on par with the Big Ten or SEC if they added those two power programs. if the Big Ten added Notre Dame, they would be hands down the best conference in the country. It's people like you that vote in the coaches poll. You assume everything before they even play. I prefer to let them play and see where it goes. and you don't? did you not presume the greatness of the Big East in any given year in the very post that I was responding to? but I agree that the voters are idiots. just look where the rank Louisville, WV and Rutgers.

Don't you think it helps that Wisconsin had more and better bowl tie-ins by playing in the Big 11 that Louisville didn't by playing in C-USA? better bowls better competition in those bowls more wins. nice try, but when Louisville is losing to Colorado State and Boise State and Miami of Ohio and Marshal while Wisconsin is beating UCLA, the last good Colorado team, and Auburn, I think it's pretty damn obvious which is the better program.

not that Neifi or Izturis belong anywhere near the top of the order, but I presume by bottom of the order hitter you mean 4, 5, 6, 7, 8? there were 96 qualified hitters in all of baseball with a .350 obp in 2006. in 2005 there were 70. you also have to consider that a large percentage of those players are 3-4 hitters. statements like this miss the reality of baseball. I want high obp's at the top of the order and the middle of the order and the bottom of the order, but sometimes you just have to settle.

ZERO EMPATHY FOR IMB!! being a Sooner fan was a bad decision and their players and coaches made bad decisions during that game.

this is comical. in any given year the Big East would be on par with the Big Ten or SEC if they added those two power programs. if the Big Ten added Notre Dame, they would be hands down the best conference in the country.

That's not Wisconsin's fault. The Big 10 has a 2 year rotating schedule that determines who is on/off the schedule. Some teams will always play each other (OSU and Michigan, PSU and MSU) but others rotate on and off. In 2005/2006, PSU did not play Iowa or Indiana, and the next 2 years, they don't play Minnesota or Northwestern. Heck, a few years back they went 2 seasons without playing Michigan. I also doubt the Big 10 is the only team that does this. just to clarify, each team in the Big Ten has three teams it plays every year. UW's are Minnesota, Iowa, and either NW or U of I, I forget.

which is the better program? 1999 Brillo Pad Bowl Boise State 34 Louisvilee 31 Rose Bowl Wisconsin 17 Stanford 9 2000 French's Dried Onion Strings Bowl Colorado State 22 Louisville 17 Sun Bowl Wisconsin 21 UCLA 20 2001 Sponge Bowl Louisville 28 BYU 10 Wisconsin - no bowl 2002 Frankfurter Bowl Marshall 38 Louisville 15 Alamo Bowl Wisconsin 31 Colorado 28 2003 Squeegie Bowl Miami of Ohio 49 Lousiville 28 Throw Rug Bowl Auburn 28 Wisconsin 14 2004 Tiddly Winks Bowl Louisville 44 Boise State 40 Outback Bowl Georgia 24 Wisconsin 21 2005 Gator Bowl VT 35 Louisville 24 Capital One Bowl Wisconsin 24 Auburn 10

I'd prefer Lilly over Meche, and I want no part of Lilly. Meche almost reached league average for the first time in four years in 2006. almost. he doesn't come close to striking out as many guys as he needs to offset the number of walks he gives up and tends to give up too many home runs for the caverous home park he played in.

it is Muskat though That's exactly what Craig and kctigers said. I'm confused. Craig and kc said the exact opposite at least as it pertains to the sandwich pick. that quip says the Cubs lose the sandwich pick, they both said the Cubs keep it.