TB_11

Proving how good Frank Thomas was, here's his first eight years OPS, compared to current player who some Cardinals fans think is the best hitter since Ted Williams: Frank Thomas OPS+ 1990: 177 (240 PAs) 1991: 180 1992: 174 1993: 177 1994: 212 1995: 178 1996: 178 1997: 181 Albert Pujols OPS+ 2001: 158 2002: 155 2003: 189 2004: 175 2005: 167 2006: 180 A completely underrated, but well deserving, first ballot Hall of Famer.

Have to wonder if this is Kenny Williams saying this season is lost. Dye, Crede, Iguchi, Podsednik, and Jenks are in the last years of their contracts as well. As are ex-Cubs Sisco and Aardsma.

Sounds like the Red Sox are looking for him to take Schilling's spot in the rotation once he's done.

The Cubs aren't an organization that's designed to allow prospects to develop. Hendry should make moves to win now. Trading Zambrano for prospects after signing Lee, Ramirez, Soriano, Lilly, etc to long-term contracts would show a lack of thought and direction that would be notable even for this organization. Before this season it mades sense to sign Zambrano to something along the lines of 5 years, $80-90M, and that was based off his performance over 145 starts over 4.5 seasons. That thinking shouldn't be changed after watching him struggle through 12 starts, or perform well after another 4.

Go to hell! That is the most ridiculous statement I've ever seen on this board. Seriously, it's the grounds fault? Please. There is nothing wrong with the field itself. I've walked on it, run through the diamond (as part of the Wrigley neighbord days) and that is the least of their worries. Sometimes it's tough to read when a poster is being sarcastic.

Z's OPS (.758) currently tops the OPS of: - Barrett - Pie - Theriot - Murton - Izturis - Jones - Koyie Hill For reference, in 2005, Z put up an impressive .300/.300/.463 line, and for the time being is performing up to that.

The odds of DiMaggio's hitting streak being topped are extremely slim, but it could conceivably happen. Cy Young's win record won't ever be touched, given the changes in the game since he played. Others that won't be touched in a few lifetimes: - Cy Young's complete games pitched - Babe Ruth's lifetime adjusted OPS+ - Ted William's career OBP

Kobe is a top 3 player but the Lakers have limited bargaining power here. The Bulls need to realize that and also realize that Kobe is going to be 29 before next season and will have 11 years on him - he's no spring chicken. I'd be wary of a Kobe trade gutting the team and that's why I'm not completely interested. This isn't to deny that Kobe is a superb basketball player, this is to determine the best possible trade for the Bulls and have the best possible team. I'm sure the Lakers will go along with whatever is the best possible trade for the Bulls. Now, I know your point was the Bulls shouldn't gut their team for Kobe, which I agree with. However, no way are the Lakers going to take Gordon, Nocioni and the #9 for Kobe. He's one of the best players in the world and the Bulls are going to get him without giving up Deng, Thomas or Hinrich. That's just not reasonable. If Deng isn't in the deal, then it's going to be Thomas, Gordon/Hinrich and the #9 at least. The Lakers don't have to trade Kobe yet. Oops, I guess I forgot to say that but I'd definitely do a TT/Gordon/#9 for Kobe. I quoted you, which was probably unfair. It's just that to get a player of Kobe's caliber, the Bulls will have to give up something that hurts. It seems a lot of posters aren't willing to do so -- Nocioni is a backup, Gordon is replaced by Kobe. Deng or Thomas will be an absolute prerequisite, I'd think. That's probably true (plus a sign and trade to make the salaries work), but there is a small possibility that Kobe holds out on the Lakers. In a situation like that Buss's best option would be to send Kobe to an Eastern Conference team that can send back young assets, albeit at 50 cents on the dollar. Kobe's holdout would put Paxson in a great bargaining position.

Actually just took a look and the Bulls would have to give up more in salaries than what Deng and Gordon make to make the deal work. Deng + Gordon + a sign and trade with Brown, or more likely Nocioni, would do it.

I'm not a huge fan of Kobe personally, but if Paxson has the opportunity to part with the 9th pick and only 2 of the key pieces, he should absolutely do this deal. I'm guessing any deal between the Lakers and Bulls would first hinge on whether the Lakers get Jermaine O'Neal or a similar big man to pair with Kobe.

Why would you expect Cubs fans to have a different opinion of a bench-clearing brawl from the fans of major league baseball games everywhere else?

Given Wheeler's performance, this can't be much of a surprise.

The right thing is to try to maximize your run scoring potential and gain victories over the opposition. I believe scoring more runs achieves this and I think the Cubs would score more runs with Soriano batting 5th than with JJ hitting there. (JJ should be on the bench or gone anyway but that's another thread.) Even if that means Soriano losing out on PAs? In the NL, a player batting 5th would have 60-70 less PAs in a given year than a player batting 1st. Yes and for the same reason that no team has their best hitter leading off (not that Soriano is our best hitter, but he's certainly hitting like it right now). You don't want your best hitter coming up on the heels of your 2 worst hitters (8th and P here). Same reason so many people were upset with Dusty for putting Corey, Neifi, etc in front of Lee in 05. You don't put a .500+ SLG guy right behind the worst hitters on your team. It's stupid. How many leadoff hitters in the history of the game were among the league-leaders in HRs and SLG. Soriano was in the top 5 and top 10, respectively last year. If he produces like that, you don't want to waste that power by hitting him after Izturis and the pitcher. With ARam out, Soriano should hit 4th (just like he hit 3rd w/ Lee out). Even with ARam back, I'd hit Soriano 4th, but 5th would still be better than 1st. Let him hit with guys on base, as long as he can keep up this .900 OPS stuff. Many would argue, and with sound backup, that the bolded statement is wrong. One study took a look at the 2000 Blue Jays, which featured a lineup that had similar characteristics to the Cubs lineup, and had Shannon Stewart and his .319/.363/.518 line batting first. According to this study's results, batting your players in descending order of OBP or OPS looks to be the best option. I would imagine looking at an NL lineup that had a pitcher batting ninth would produce similar results, although to a lesser degree.

The right thing is to try to maximize your run scoring potential and gain victories over the opposition. I believe scoring more runs achieves this and I think the Cubs would score more runs with Soriano batting 5th than with JJ hitting there. (JJ should be on the bench or gone anyway but that's another thread.) Even if that means Soriano losing out on PAs? In the NL, a player batting 5th would have 60-70 less PAs in a given year than a player batting 1st.

That's due to regress, but I've seen more outrageous BABIP and for longer (BP Upton). I'm not sure "regress" is the right word, though. Crash might be more accurate. Even last year his BABIP was .302. Soriano has never been a high BA guy. In fact, his BA last year was .277. His career high in 2002 was an even .300. Once his BABIP starts to drop, hopefully he'll become a little more patient. His IsoD is .027 lower than it was last year, which will need some improvement over the full season, and his IsoP .041 lower. The challenge for him will be to see if he can continue to put up good numbers when some of those balls start not to drop for hits. Personally, I'm just hoping for a few good seasons out of Soriano. I don't think there's any way he lives up to his contract in any of the 8 seasons (when looking at the contract divided evenly across the seasons instead of the way it's backloaded right now), so I can only keep my fingers crossed that something good happens very soon with this team. Even with the possibilities of market inflation down the road, it doesn't look pretty. The way he's hitting this year, he should have a higher BA he has put up historically. His LD% is 22.1% this year, which translates roughly to a BABIP of .340. Over the last three years he's put up LD% of 18.7%, 19.0%, and 19.6%. While his BABIP is due to regress, it shouldn't drop to just .300 if he keeps on hitting like he has.

Clemens line against the Pirates, who, coming into the game, was collectively OPSing .694 and on pace to score a whopping 672 runs in 2007: IP: 6.0 Pitches/Strikes: 108/69 Hits: 5 Walks: 2 SO: 7 HR: 0 Quotes from the media and Yankees: Good grief.

Link And images of the Boston fans taunting A-Rod: http://www.nypost.com/seven/06022007/img/front060207.jpg And people bash the Post's journalistic integrity.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05302007/img/front053007.jpg

I saw on BP that the Cubs are 2nd in the NL in Defensive Efficiency (measured as 1-BABIP). How useful is this stat? Does it indicate that the Cubs defense has been strong? Or is this another relatively uninformative defensive statistic?

Could we get a list of things that he's doing wrong? So far I have: 1) Inability to manage his bullpen during games, inability to determine who should actually be in the bullpen in between games 2) Starting people in the outfield who clearly should be on the bench Others?

He hasn't rarely batted leadoff. In fact, he has batted leadoff most of his career. He has 2186 at-bats in the leadoff spot, and the next highest number from any spot is 630 from the 3rd spot. Oh, I guess I overlooked the Yankee years. But are where are those stats from? There are a lot of hitters who would bat better in the Yankee lineup, regardless of where they hit. I still think its absurd. There is plenty of protection in the lineup from Lee and Ramirez. There's just no need to put a pitcher and #8 hitter in front of him. 2004(Texas): .907 OPS batting leadoff(~75 PA's), .808 OPS total 2005(Texas): .781 OPS batting leadoff(~110 PA's), .821 OPS total 2006(Washington): .956 OPS batting leadoff(~675 PA's), .911 OPS total 2007(Chicago): .859 OPS batting leadoff(~145 PA's), .817 OPS total Has there been any analysis done to see if the difference in OPS (or maybe just the SLG component) is enough to justify Soriano having fewer PAs with runners on? To take it to extreme, if his OPS was .850 leading off, but .845 batting fourth, it would make complete sense to drop him in the lineup to take advantage of his SLG since he'll have more PAs with runners on.

Lou has shown he doesn't know how to handle a bullpen during games, and now he's showing he doesn't know how to handle a bullpen between games either.

The MLBPA wouldn't allow this without a serious fight.

As long as Meph keeps his avatar, he's encouraged to make as many posts as possible.

Very valid point. To date, Soriano has been extremely lucky, and at some point that luck will run out (for reference, his LD% has been 18.7%, 19.0% and 19.6% the last three years). When it does, we will be left with a leadoff hitter who gets on base at the same level, if not worse, than whipping-boy Juan Pierre did last year.