FergieJ31

:lol: Maybe Dusty meant "flare" not "flair", and the reporter mistyped? :D I wouldn't mind seeing Juan start dropping a few bloopers into the OF. Good catch on "flair" vs. "flare." You could be a copy editor. I typed it as "flare," because Dusty meant it as a bloop hit, not flash and panache. The OBP of .257 needs a little work. Thank you Bruce - I accept the job :wink: and as JP increases his .257 OBP he'll certainly do it with flair.

I tend to agree - Hawk Harrelson's theory is a bit far-fetched: http://www.suntimes.com/output/couch/cst-spt-greg14.html

This fluff piece is certainly on par with what we heard about Prior in 2002: http://www.minorleaguenews.com/baseball/features/articles2005/08/15/01.html This quote is interesting: If this is true, I'm impressed with the Mariners coaching philosophy. I wish the Cubs had the foresight to ask their young flamethrowers to turn it down a notch and learn to pitch effectively first (and I hope I'm not dangerously sounding like Steve Stone here).

:lol: Maybe Dusty meant "flare" not "flair", and the reporter mistyped? :D I wouldn't mind seeing Juan start dropping a few bloopers into the OF.

You need to read the second article. That number wasn't adjusted for some important factors; defensive alignment, the jump in batter performance with any runner on first, the relative quality of pitchers with runners on vs. with the bases empty, etc. The real benefit is much smaller, somewhere in the order of 0-3 runs per season. The author's numbers are extremely flawed since he compares a select few players that are known as base stealers compared to an overall group that also includes those same base stealers and other leaser known base stealers. It should make a seperate comparison of good base stealers versus poor base stealers. He is cherry picking numbers to try to support his argument when the basis of comparison is flawed. The overlap between the group of all runners and first base and the ones considered stealers is negligible. (About 3% of the 100,000+ sample size.) Removing the stealers from the overall group would have had no significant imapct on the outcome. The results are also verified by his independent method of adjusting for defensive shits and pitcher quality. (Though that method showed a slightly larger disruptive effect.) The analysis is still supportive of my conclusion that a base stealer can disrupt a pitcher's focus on the following batter. Batting average is a much better measure of this effect than runs scored. Runs scored also takes into account that base stealers get caught stealing, thereby reducing the overall number of runs scored. I'm not talking about runs scored... I'm talking about distracting the pitcher. In any event, the analysis is nevertheless flawed as a theoretical matter because the author is comparing a barrel of apples (base stealers) to a mixed barrel of oranges (non-base stealers) and apples (base stealers). The assumption that this error has only a 3% negligible effect is incorrect because it assumes, ipso facto, that the other 97% of runners are non-base stealers. Without doing a statistical analysis, I'd venture to say that more than 3% of baseball players are capable base stealers. I agree with katway - I'm less than convinced by that Hardball Times analysis. In Part 2, the author used a "complicated" (author's word) method, which I found difficult to follow, and whose statistical significance seems suspect at any rate, and a 2nd "simpler" method of separating out a golden group of annointed basestealers against a control group of ALL players. Why separate out the fastest runners? The fact is, a pitcher must pay attention to MOST runners on first -- all but the SLOWEST guys in the league would logically disrupt the pitcher to some degree. But all but the slowest guys will also force a change in defensive alignment (1B holding the runner). The 2nd method is a specious argument IMO, inherently biased in favor of the null hypothesis that a speedy guy on first does not disrupt the pitcher. The disruption effect is extremely difficult to isolate statistically because defensive alignment changes are so positively correlated. Also, I didn't see the author use any data involving errant pickoff attempts, which give speedy runners one or two extra bases - did I miss that? I really think you need to watch the games to see the disruption effect and hear from ex-professional pitchers (anyone?) - I believe it's a real effect.

Felix made his MLB debut on Sept 3 at home vs St Louis, the famous "6-run Cardinals lead" game. Sanchez came in to relieve Clement with two on and two outs in the 6th with the Cubs down 2-0. He promptly walked Vina to load the bases, gave up a granny to Drew, walked Pujols, then got Tino out on a deep drive to center. Cubs started their comeback in the bottom of the 6th vs Fassero and would eventually win 8-7. Good times. (Perhaps this is a bad day to recall the inauspicious MLB debut of a Cub southpaw vs. the Cards.)

I also think booing JJ after just two home games is pretty sad and embarrassing. If he weren't hustling or was as nonchalant as Corey often appeared to be (I realize appearances can be deceiving), that's one thing -- but JJ's clearly putting in an effort, and pressing at the plate.

It usually takes offense and pitching defense to win: 74.1% of MLB division winners have been above average at both. 15.3% of MLB division winners have been above average at defense but not offense. 10.0% of MLB division wiinners have been above average at offense but not defense. 0.6% of MLB division winners have been below average at both. (The 1987 Twins, if anyone wants to know.) Interesting stat BK. Got any idea what the statistical significance of the 15.3% and 10.0% numbers are (a t-stat or some standard error estimate)? As for the '87 Twins, they also were the only team to ever win a WS with a below-500 record on the road, if memory serves. (I was actually pulling for the Cards in that WS, so deep is my hatred for playing baseball in the Rollerdome.) While I'd love to see Abreu in a Cub uniform I don't see it happening unless they overpay in pitching, which would be a huge mistake. Look at the Cubs' offense in 2003: a full year of Agony and Miller in the lineup. Offense isn't what took them to the NLCS that year.

:lol: Exactly!! Wrigley must become a house of pain (figuratively speaking) for opposing teams, especially NL Central. In the Blackhawks' heyday (approx '83 - '94) they would put a highly competitive, bruising but talented team on the ice, year in and year out. Other teams would openly dread coming to the old Stadium, which as a Blackhawks fan was music to my ears.

Dempster didn't get a save - there is some discretion on the part of the official scorer only if a reliever goes 3+ innings and the scorer deems them "effective", see © below. The rule is, the last pitcher of the winning team gets the save if he isn't the winning pitcher and EITHER: (a) he comes into the game with a lead of no more than three runs, and pitches at least one full inning, OR (b) he comes into the game with the potential tying run being either on base, at bat, or on deck. In other words, the potential tying run is either already on base or is one of the first two batters he faces, OR © he pitches at least three "effective" innings (this is the only subjective criterion and is judged by the official scorer).

NSBB PBP is better!! Seconded :D

Lee > Pujols on Apr 7 2006 :D

I just hope Z isn't too yipped up tomorrow.

Ahh music to me ears :D CFiCT is a good sport posting here win or lose.

Sweet!! Let's make it 2 in a row tomorrow behind big Z.

Ahhh some good old-fashioned trash talk ... man I love this rivalry.

Yep, really his hitting streak was stopped at 2.

Amen. Great story - props to TLR. (never thought I'd write "props" and "TLR" in the same sentence)

I said entity has very little measureable effect, how important is it? We're in agreement - please note what I bolded above.

So you admit that speed is not as important as OBP, but then you claim it's sickeninig that people don't think it's as important as OBP? Comparing "speed" vs "OBP" is comparing apples and oranges. You don't want to sacrifice too much team OBP for an increase in team speed, but how much is "too much"? We can take a proxy for team speed (SB maybe) and measure its historical marginal effect on runs created for instance, to attempt to answer that question, but the results would be dubious IMO. In anemic_offense's defense, I interpreted his original post to refer to more qualitative aspects of the game -- things that are difficult or impossible to measure with stats but are apparent when you watch the games. And I would agree with him 100% on that.

I was at that game, standing room only seats right down the first base line. And let me tell you, if you want to know why the concrete at Wrigley was cracking after that year, it's because the stadium was shaking violently after that home run. Literally. Everything was moving, the seats, the railings. It was simply amazing. I've never been apart of something that loud and that exciting before in my life. I was starting to praise Bartman for extending the series so I could be there when they won the pennant. Of course, a short while later, I'd never be that depressed before in my life. I still haven't recovered. Wow. My brothers were at game 7 and told me the same thing about Woody's HR; Wrigley was literally shaking. The cameras caught the massive throng on Waveland Ave too. Here's another Wood video on youtube.com, the most dominant 9-inning pitching performance in MLB history. Listen to the crowd really get into it after the 6th inning (even though it wasn't a full house). Holy crap that breaking ball ... this will give you goose bumps too: http://youtube.com/watch?v=OBkYWlWoJyM&search=kerry%20wood At the end of the game, you can see someone in the bleachers with an improvised sign: "E-5" :cry: I can't wait to see Wood's Wrigley debut this year.

I picked this tidbit off on cubs.com---I know, I know, but---and I don't know how credibility is it, but....I think it should be interesting debate. Would anybody here at least consider a Felix Pie for Howie Kendrick trade? Is this the exact quote of an AP news release? I can't believe this to be real as the spelling and grammar are horrible. I'm betting this to be a fake. I counted 7 spelling & grammatical errors. DEFINITELY faked.

What's the second best game, and how far behind was it? I only have data from 1990-2004 (no 2005 yet on retrosheet.org, but should be there soon). Here are the most dominant games in that period (9 inning complete games only): 105 5/ 6/1998 Houston at Chicago (Kerry Wood 1 hit 20k) 101 5/ 1/1991 Toronto at Texas (Nolan Ryan no hitter) 100 5/18/2004 Arizona at Atlanta (Randy Johnson's perfect game, 17th in history) 100 4/ 7/2002 Arizona at Milwaukee (Schilling 1 hit 17k) 99 4/26/1990 White Sox at Texas (Ryan, 1 hit 16k) 99 8/25/1998 KC at Toronto (Rocket, 3 hits 18k) 99 10/ 6/1991 Mets at Philadelphia (David Cone 3 hit 19k, final game of year) 99 6/11/1990 Texas at Oakland (Ryan no hitter, 2 bb 14k) 99 5/25/2001 Toronto at Boston (Nomo 1 hit 0 bb 14k) 99 6/23/1994 KC at Oakland (Witt 1 hit 0 bb 14k)

I'm sure this has been mentioned umpteen times on this board, but Bill James and his wild statistical formulas took all the factors into consideration and says that this was the single most dominating pitching performance in the history of baseball. Not that I doubt you but where did you read this? Also the Gaetti fan club loves NSBB! http://www.stathead.com/bbeng/woolner/statglossary.htm Bill James' Game Score formula measures pitcher dominance in a particular game: 1. Start with 50 points 2. Add 1 point for every out (3 points = 1 IP) 3. Add 2 points for each inning completed after the 4th 4. Add 1 point for every strikeout 5. Subtract 2 points for each hit allowed 6. Subtract 4 for each earned run allowed 7. Subtract 2 for each unearned run allowed 8. Subtract 1 for each walk The top game score in the history of baseball is Kerry's 20k game with a score of 105.

I heard they met at Cactus, a south Loop watering hole near the options exchange, and that the future Mrs Wood was working as a waitress there ... no idea if this is actually true or not, just what I heard from a friend who works around there.