nilodnayr

Rasmus and Reyes? No way. Maybe, maybe not, but do you see Beuhrle staying with the White Sox past 2007? No, and that's why I don't think the Cards would part with that much for a free agent at the end of next season (one who, as RationalSoxFan pointed out, is likely headed to St Louis as a free agent). Well maybe, the Cards won't add Rasmus, BUT I doubt it will take only Reyes. I do think Buehlre will be dealt, the question is...would a team like NY be willing to give up Heilman and Milledge for Buehlre (seeing as that was the going package for a similar pitcher in Zito) that also includes a deal similar to what Zito gets? What I am saying is...I don't see Buehrle going to St. Louis JUST YET. I think the Mets will swooped in and offer said package of Heilman/Milledge for Buehrle and then extend him at a deal OF SAY 5 YRS AT OVER $11 MILL per. So, again, while Buehrle "heart" maybe in St. Lou, but I think his agent/MLBPA would pushed him into taking a "higher deal" then what the Cards will offer. Huh? Beuhrle is a FA after next year, if the cards offered Reyes for Beuhrle straight up that would be an amazing deal for the sox. One that is much much better than the deal this thread is based upon.

I think its more a case of timing. The Sox don't have anywhere to put McCarthy at the moment, but could need someone in the next year or two. The Rangers need someone who can contribute now. Don't have anywhere to put him? Like I said, this trade would have made all the sense in the world last offseason (when they didn't have anywhere to put him and the Rangers started off the season with major question marks in their rotation), however they just traded Freddy and have a spot in the rotation for him now.

Expected BABIP for knuckleballers is very different than expected BABIP for other pitchers. What should it be then? Here is what Wake has done: Actual vs Expected (LD%+.120) 2002: 245 vs 300; 55 better 2003: 297 vs 327; 30 better 2004: 288 vs 256; 32 worse 2005: 265 vs 291; 26 better 2006: 276 vs 284; 8 better He's done better than expected overall, but 04 was worse and 06 was pretty much right on. Should a knuckler's expected BABIP be LD%+.100, or is using LD% not even a valid way of estimating? For comparison, here are 2006 stats for two other knucklers in the minors, both of whom are very close to the LD%+.120 estimation. Jered Fernandez's actual BABIP last year was 308 vs an expected of 292. Charlie Zink's actual BABIP last year was 272 vs an expected of 265.

Hes a knuckleballer who has a good chance of completely tanking in the majors. His WHIPs (except for last year, see next sentence), K/9 and BB/9 have been horrible. Last year his BABIP was 40 points lower than expected, explaining the good WHIP. With a guy like that who puts the ball in play, you have to get lucky to do well. Its not magic that there are only a few knuckleballers in the majors. It just doesn't work well against major leaguers. McCarthy is also 23 and has had unlucky HR/FB ratios in the majors. Haeger had a lucky ratio last year, but being a knuckleballer, that is probably predictable.

In 2005 the Cell ranked 1st in HR park factor (1.375), Ameriquest 4th (1.263). In 2006 the Cell ranked 2nd in HR park factor (1.307), Ameriquest 12th (1.066). what about runs? They were pretty close. In 2006 Ameriquest was 1.081 to the Cell's 1.054, in 2005 they were 1.076 to 1.044.

That sentence right there makes your user name quite ironic.

I have serveral life-time diehard Sox fans and they all called me saying the same thing. It might be good for long term or might not, but the fact remains if you can win now why plan for long term. Except for penny-pinching, I don't understand this deal. The Sox weren't that far out of it this year and a few good moves put them right back in it. Along with all of these prospects (and they are just that until they prove themselves), you've got a future of Thome digressing or retiring, Konerko regressing, and Dye leaving for FA. The only way some of these trades make any sense is if they use the young pitching in trade for young positional players (Crawford, Baldelli, Cabrera, etc.). Also, if they're going young, they had better trade Buerhle at some point. What has McCarthy proved? It's not like he's been dominating MLB. This deal could better their team this year and in the future. I don't see how this deal could possibly better their team this year. Masset will most likely not have a significant role in the pen and Danks will probably spend the entire year in the minors. Unless you think the winner of the Floyd/Haeger battle is going to do better than McCarthy, then how can you say that this deal could be better for the team this year?

Last year McCarthy proved he can put up a 4.68 ERA as a relief pitcher. A) 4.68 is league average B) Hes a starter C) In his apperances of 4 innings or more in 2006 his ERA was 2.79 D) In 2005 he had a 110 ERA+

While Danks has a slightly better upside than McCarthy, McCarthy has proved himself at the major league level. I'll take proof over potential any day of the week when we are talking about such a small difference in potential. I think the big dealmaker for KW is Masset. However, with the bullpen they have now, I don't see how he is really going to make a difference with Jenks, Aardsma, Thornton, and MacDougal all set to be there for quite a while. This move would have made a ton of sense last offseason, its quite a noodle scratcher this year.

In 2005 the Cell ranked 1st in HR park factor (1.375), Ameriquest 4th (1.263). In 2006 the Cell ranked 2nd in HR park factor (1.307), Ameriquest 12th (1.066).

Dawson, no question. Santo, it's a little fuzzier there. I'm a big proponent of comparing players to others that have played their given position. If a guy is one of the ten best 1B, 2B, etc., he belongs in. Looking at 1B, Gehrig and Foxx were unquestionably better than Bagwell. The next tier would have to be McGwire, Bagwell, Greenberg (better player, but shorter career), Johnny Mize, Eddie Murray, Killebrew, Cap Anson, McCovey and Frank Thomas. Ignoring the whole steroid business, I'd probably rank them as: 1. Gehrig 2. Foxx 3. Greenberg (I think guys should be given credit when they missed some of their prime years due to the war - not penalized for this) 4. McGwire 5. Mize 6. Bagwell 7. Thomas 8. Killebrew 9. Murray 10. McCovey whereas 3B I would go: 1. Schmidt 2. Eddie Mathews 3. George Brett 4. Boggs 5. Santo 6. Home Run Baker 7. Molitor 8. Brooks Robinson 9. Stan Hack 10. Rolen So even though Bagwell was clearly the better hitter, I'd call him and Santo about even based on where they rank at their respective positions. I understand your criteria, but personally don't agree with position comparisons much especially when we are talking about first and thirdbasemen. Look at KC. They have Alex Gordon and Mark Teahen. They are going to have to move one or the other to the OF. What happens if Gordon gets moved to the OF, puts up 15 years of 150 OPS+ seasons. Does he not deserve to get into the HOF because the Royals just happened to also have Mark Teahen block him at 3b so in comparison his #s don't look as spectacular to other OFs of all time. Also, see Pujols and Cabrerra. I feel that there are guys who are great defensively and can play defensively demanding positions and there are guys who are good defensively who play less defensively demanding positions well. Santo could have very easily ended up as a 1b if he came up with the Braves. This is the criteria I used when I said Bagwell has a signficantly stronger case. Bagwell finished with a career 150 OPS+, vs Santo's 125, a significant difference. Bagwell outpaced Santo in Black Ink (24 to 11), Grey Ink (157 to 147), HOF Standards (59 to 40.9) and HOF Monitor (149.5 to 88). They both played positions which are not traditionally thought of as defensive, but very much excelled at them defensively, I call that part of their game a tie.

In 2004, he didn't have enough ABs to be eligible, but his PrOPS that year was .047. This past year, it was -.037. This suggests that he was a little unlucky in 2006. So, aside from the steroid issue I mentioned above, I think this also suggests that Giles was quite lucky from 2003-2005. He might not be as bad as he was in 2006, but chances are that 2003-2005 won't happen again either. Another thing to consider if, you know, you didn't read my post a half an hour before yours. Kidding. The PrOPS is interesting, but even with those projected OPS, he would be top 5 or 6 in the NL. Not too shabby for the salary. Interesting that DeRosas PrOPS in 05 was .862, .098 more than his actual. His BABIP was horrible that year. And although it was .348 in 06, his increase in LD% predicted a .346, as opposed to 2005 where his BABIP was .267 actual vs predicted of .324.

Alot of people were saying the same things about his brother. And Jones outproduced Brian last year. Could we atleast give Derosa a chance? You're back. Do I really need to go around saying this all the time? Cut the guy a little slack, alright? I'm tired of this crap. Thanks Tim! It'd sure be nice if people actually responded to my comment, instead of resorting to child like teasing. Ok, I will respond to your comment. Its ignorant. Just because his brother had a down year and the player we acquired instead of him had an up year (their performance ended up being nearly equivalent), it should have no bearing whatsoever on our view of Marcus. Just because Jody Hull sucked, doesn't mean that hockey teams shouldn't have desired Brett Hull. DeRosa is on our team now and we have no choice but to give him a chance, but that doesn't mean it should end conversation as to whether or not Marcus is going to have a better season than him.

Agreed. I would rather have Theriot in the lineup instead of Izturis. I would too, but I don't think its that great of a possibility unless Izturis has lingering health issues or makes repeatedly horrible plays on defense. I think Theriot is the type of guy Lou will love, and I hope he tears it up in ST, but even so, I think something will have to happen to a starter for him to make the jump. Theriot's best chance is for DeRosa to bomb, and while some of us think that might happen, none of us hope for it.

hey cheapseats... I'm assuming you chose your name from the show. Well I'm on vacation in LA and was hiking in Runyon's Canyon the other day and ran into none other than Randy and Jason Sklar. I don't think they ever leave each other's side. Yay for seeing celebrities in LA!

I'd think about it, as they have some similar tools, but I have more hope for Pie than I do for Rios. Rios probably won't be a high K guy, but his IsoD numbers in the majors and minors have been mediocre to abysmal. He'll probably give you 25-30 HRs in his peak. However, his OBP is strongly tied to his AVG; he'll have to be able to maintain good BABIP and LD percentages over his career to be a productive hitter. If he goes into a slump where he can't hit his way out of a paper bag, he won't have patience to pick up the slack. I don't know if Rios has the speed and instincts to play CF. If he doesn't, then I'd shy away from dealing Pie for him. Actually, the only difference between Rios of 06 and previous years, was that he hit an insanely low amount of fly balls in 04 and 05 (juan pierre level), and was somewhat normal in 06. He never really showed much power in the minors (he only had one season with an IsoP >103). I don't think the minor league splits go back to when he was in the minors so I don't know his FB%, but I'm guessing, based on his HR #s that 06 was an abberation. His LD%s have been pretty average and consistent and his 06 BABIP was only .010 higher than expected, so I wouldn't consider it fluke lucky in terms of balls finding holes. But in order for him to put up future season of OPS significantly greater than 800 hes going to have to put the ball in the air like his abberational 06 year.

ok, now post his numbers for 03, 04, and 05. interestingly enough, steroid testing began in 2006. Didn't it begin in '05? Yes, thats correct. It began in 2005. Also, Giles' BABIP was .032 lower than expected in 06 (it was .025 and .023 higher than expected in 04 and 05).

ok, now post his numbers for 03, 04, and 05. interestingly enough, steroid testing began in 2006. His IsoP in 2004 was only 7 points higher than in 2006.

That could be said about a lot of players......Santo, Dawson, Blyleven, etc. While I love Santo and Dawson, Bagwell makes a significantly stronger case for the HOF.

So do I and all the options are bad except finding a CFer or keeping JJ. Keeping Jones and playing him in CF is not a bad option. It's a mediocre option, but not bad. I think that's what he was saying, the options are bad except .... keeping JJ. I think the bad options are using DeRosa in the OF and playing Theriot everyday, or starting Pie. Jones in CF is the best realistic option at this point, unless some trade target becomes available. From the quotes that keep coming out, I don't think that the Cubs are planning to play Jones in CF whatsoever. Look at the quote carefully-it says for Soriano to play one of the corners, they first have to move Jones. If Jones ends up not getting moved, I bet the defensive alignment will have Soriano in center and Jones in right, although the Cubs would prefer to trade Jones, sign a center fielder, and have Soriano in right. And what about Hendry promising Soriano that he would not move him around? If they chose to go with Soriano in CF next year, then either Pie moves to RF for the long term, or Hendry takes back his promise.

Just because we "aren't looking for power out of him" doesn't mean it's okay to have absolutely none. And he doesnt' have any potential. He is what he is, which isn't good. He's the same player he was in the minors, which is nothing. The last thing the Cubs need to be doing is acquiring guys for their defense, they haven't sucked because of defense. They've sucked because their lineup has sucked and their rotation has sucked. Taveras was worse than Pierre last year. His OBP ticked higher last year, barely, it was just .008. He also had a decline in AVG and SLG. That's not a sign of a guy who's poised to show off his potential. He doesn't produce worth a crap, and the Cubs don't need anymore people who don't produce. This would be a horrible acquisition, as usual. It's more of the pitcher's have a game plan against Willy. Now it's time for Willy to make the adjustments. I didn't realize that adjustments can only be made during the offseason. Where did I say that? You said that his decline in AVG and SLG from 05 to 06 was due to pitcher's game plan against Willy and now its time for him to make adjustments. Meaning that pitchers adjusted last offseason to Willy, which resulted in the drops and now Willy must adjust this offseaon. If adjustments ocurred during the season then it would not be appropriate to use them as a reason for differences in year to year changes.

Actually, even with one working shoulder Wilkerson's 83 OPS+ was significantly better than Taveras' 72 OPS+ in 2006.

Just because we "aren't looking for power out of him" doesn't mean it's okay to have absolutely none. And he doesnt' have any potential. He is what he is, which isn't good. He's the same player he was in the minors, which is nothing. The last thing the Cubs need to be doing is acquiring guys for their defense, they haven't sucked because of defense. They've sucked because their lineup has sucked and their rotation has sucked. Taveras was worse than Pierre last year. His OBP ticked higher last year, barely, it was just .008. He also had a decline in AVG and SLG. That's not a sign of a guy who's poised to show off his potential. He doesn't produce worth a crap, and the Cubs don't need anymore people who don't produce. This would be a horrible acquisition, as usual. It's more of the pitcher's have a game plan against Willy. Now it's time for Willy to make the adjustments. I didn't realize that adjustments can only be made during the offseason.

They didn't have to sign (rather bid) for Iwamura to begin with. They were smart, saw an undervalued player, and went ahead with him even though its not a point of need. One of these days they are going to start trading their position players and they are going to have a great team. Unfortunately they will still be in the AL East.

A ,055 IsoD is only good if you are hitting .300. Saying his patience is better than Pierre's is like saying his physique is better than Matt Stairs'. But unlike Matt Stairs' physique, its improving! Again..I'm not saying the guy is great...just that at age 24, he's improving...if he continues to improve, he could be a very solid player, if his OBP would improve 8 points a year between now and age 28, he'll make a lot of money in free agency. And if Ryan Church's OPS+ keeps on improving 8 points a year, he'll be a hall of famer when he reaches free agency.