Productive Outs

I've got a feeling he's been "blackballed" outside of SF already. The environment comparing SF to the rest of the league is night and day -- SF has put up with him because of the fan support, but I highly doubt another team would even consider him. I can think of one power-challenged team that could sure use him for the rest of this year. his .495 OBP wouldn't hurt matters either.

This is my general line of thinking as well when it comes to Bonds.

just for fun, name your 12

what? +1. Eh? Case in point, it takes more than muscles to hit Homeruns. how long was Barry allegedly on the drug? We don't know Did Barry use anything other than "the Clear" or "the Cream" for any legitamite period of time? We don't know. So just stop accusing Bonds of everything that you can't prove damnit. is bonds your uncle or something? seriously, you're not in any place to tell other users what they can or cannot do.

i would move andruw to RF before i'd move pie. if it's a dealbreaker, i let andruw play where he wants to play. I've never heard Andruw say one way or another where he wants to play. The likelihood is, the question has never come up because few teams have a comparable defensive CF to Andruw. it'd be hard to move one of the top defensive CF's in the game to a different position--plus he's in the prime of his career. he is not one of the top defensive center fielders any more. he's went down a lot in the past few years.

i would move andruw to RF before i'd move pie.

Cobb would have told you that his seeming lack of power was because he didn't want to hit home runs. He thought it was a coward's way to score runs. To prove that point to the media, when he was 38 and playing against Ruth's Yankees near the end of his career, he hit 5 home runs in 2 days. Although it would be silly to try and say that Cobb or any other person back then had the power swing that Ruth had. Then Cobb was a freaking idiot, wasn't he? yeah, i've heard this before from OMC, and it just really shows how stupid cobb was. so stupid, in fact, that i think he simply got lucky after he said that.

i sure would hate to have that .272/.490/.551 line on my team

I agree. I get tired of reading posts with these Moneyball stats being the only way to evaluate a player. Sure OPS is a useful stat, but I refuse to believe that any one stat can truly reflect someone's value. they're not the only way, but on a message board, they're usually the best.

Yes but giving Theriot overall season numbers, SS isn't the place to look for upgrades. SS isn't a hole I've said it a million times why do you have to have a "hole" per se to upgrade?

yep, cause we all know you can only look at one year's worth of PAs to judge a player.

it's possible, but tim would be spending more on servers.

why does everyone think murton's .60 isod is so special? adam dunn is an OBP heavy hitter -- matt murton is not.

cedeno >>>> theriot

pretty much what we've been saying for a while.

all time: babe ruth barry bonds ted williams walter johnson roger clemens

87.5 WARP3, .283 EqA through age 30. he's easily a hall of famer if he keeps that kind of production up through the second half of his career. his defense has went down a lot in the last few years, though.

he's up to .258/.350/.475. where as his may was an awful .205/.316/.361, he's at .312/.391/.636 in june. he's managed to increase his walk rate each of the last three years to a respectable 12.1% this year, while decreasing his K rate by 7.3%. i'm not sayin', i'm just sayin'.

http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t6/tdob/epatt.jpg gotta love firstinning

Soto's .385 BABIP worries me :(

Sunny, I'm pretty sure that use of the term "albatross" is usually restricted to situations where a player is a problem for a team because: 1) the team gets almost no production out of the player (sometimes this is evaluated against salary rather than absolute production vs. league average) 2) the player is highly paid 3) the player's contract is long-term 4) the player is essentially untradable Normal usage of the term, at least in the analytical baseball community, seems to require all four of those conditions, so that an albatross player is one who sucks, will suck for a long time, and must be expected to continue dragging the team down for several seasons to come. Obviously, the term is not precisely defined. Reasonable people might disagree about what constitutes "almost no production" or "highly paid," although it's clear that "highly paid" must mean "highly paid relative to other major league baseball players of comparable skill" or "highly paid relative to the baseball talent market" or even "highly paid relative to an idealized model of the baseball talent market," and emphatically not "highly paid relative to your average blue collar worker." A standard exception to these requirements is somebody who has met the criteria for several consecutive years immediately prior to this one, but is now in the last year of his contract. Obviously, to use the term albatross correctly, it is neccessary to show that the player's low production resulted from conditions that can be expected to persist into the future; one-time injuries, bad luck, and other external factors need to be removed from the equation. Often it is neccesary to look at available levels of replacement talent as well. I didn't begin this post to take issue with your classification of Barrett as an albatross, but it is interesting to compare the Barrett situation with the definition of albatross that I have proposed. It would be possible to argue against your assessment of Barrett on the basis that Barrett has been unlucky or, alternately, on the basis that two months of poor production, even if genuinely bad, are not enough to make it reasonable to expect him to suck for the indefinite future. More obviously, and more relevantly for the definition of the term albatross, Barrett has not sucked in the past, and as an upcoming free agent would never have been in a position to become a long-term problem for the team. I'll leave it to others to draw the conclusions. =D> I love reading your posts. Please post more. i think he would have won the tournament had he signed up.

definitely. number 2 holds more significance with me, as i was 8 years old at that game in 1996. i've never seen a park so against one player before or since. that game really flared up my hatred for reds fans.

Why do you hate posters with a wacky sense of humor so much? it's not like tree just makes jokes all the time, either. he's a sabr god.

dunn's walk rate has dropped 4.2% from last year. he's still got an OPS of .938, but his line would look much better if it was sporting a .380+ OBP.

Think I might need my Dobson-to-English dictionary for that one. http://www.dictionary.com