Rob
-
Posts
15,250 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
13
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Rob
-
What exactly is it that you think this HOF argument proves? That wins matter? Or that they're valued by sportswriters? And how is it proving a point to look at a pitcher nobody is debating was good, only to point at one minor number in their stats and say "this is why they're good"? It only proves that you think that's why they're good. You haven't made a cogent argument yet, but you carry yourself as though you're teaching all us whippersnappers a thing or two about baseball, by golly. It'd be comical if it weren't so sad. -
Well it depends on how you go about fielding that old team. The Cubs were older than most and not good. If you have 32 year old stars, you have known quantities and will be good. If you have 31 year old mediocre players, you will be younger but worse. And generally, the youngest teams will be teams in transition, who had to get rid of their established players and go with a bunch of youth, much of which maybe should still be in the minors. Youth, in and of itself, is not a quality. But at the same time, neither is age. A 36 year old journeyman is a 36 year old journeyman and a 23 overmatched player is still overmatched. If you are older, but good, that's great, if you are older, and not good, that's really bad. And that's the Cubs. If you are younger and good, that is ideal, but if you are a younger and bad, at least there is room for improvement. I agree, but age alone is not a negative. Some here act like that's the most important metric. Age is the most important metric when you're giving multi-year contracts to guys on the wrong side of 30. Stop making things up.
-
I think it's more likely because of an injury, but that's the crux of it, yeah. The Cubs may have gone 16-10 during that month Soto was out, but it was in no way because Hill did his job anywhere near acceptably well. He's exposed quickly when given too much time. As such, provided the cost is cheap enough, I wouldn't be opposed to acquiring a more reliable backup.
-
Agreed judging pitchers value by season-season wins is going to give you very mixed results on how good a pitcher actually is. However I do think wins can be used, to a point, for judging the value/effectiveness of a pitcher over a whole career. Along with all the other things like whip, era+, k/9, h/9, etc. No, you can't. The assumption that Wins might mean something in the long run is based on the idea that a pitcher is likely to be on an equal number of bad teams and good teams. Careers just aren't long enough to make that assumption, especially considering how long a team has control over a player when they break into the league. There are numerous, better metrics to use in evaluating a player. I'd barely even bother to gloss over wins when trying to judge a player's worth.
-
In 1987 Nolan Ryan pitched 211.3 innings (good for 9th in the league). He did this with an ERA a quarter of run lower than anybody else in the league, and he lead the league in strikeouts. He allowed the second fewest HR/9. Had the highest K/BB ratio in the league. He allowed the fewest H/9. Despite all of this, he went 8 - 16 and lead the league in losses. W-L record is a joke and says a hell of a lot more about the team than it does about the pitcher. Anybody who still uses it to judge a pitcher's worth in this day and age needs to be taken out back and put out of their misery Old Yeller style.
-
why would he? Because Hill isn't very good?
-
I keep getting the feeling we're going to trade for Burrell and get hosed both there and when we have to flip him.
-
So apparently it's Cameron we're after...
Rob replied to ctcf's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Okay, help me out here because I obviously don't understand intangibles. How exactly is having a PED user on the team just fine, but having an [expletive] (who hasn't broken any rules) isn't? I like Mike Cameron. He's a hell of a baseball player. But for all those people trying to justify letting Bradley go on some sort of moral grounds, it seems like your logic train jumped the tracks if you're okay with acquiring Cameron to replace him. -
Figgins and Mariners close to deal
Rob replied to Cubswin11's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
I would never give a player who is so reliant upon his speed for value a 4 year deal... especially a speed player over 30. One badly pulled hamstring and you've got no value left. -
Winning ballgames is what sells the tickets. The fans will always find players to dump the "face of the franchise" label onto. OK so suggest a trade that allows the Tigers to win more ballgames in 2010. Why is 2010 the only year that matters? Even the Mayan apocalypse crazies believe there'll be 2011 and 2012 baseball seasons.
-
If the Cubs still like Fontenot better than Baker, it's because he's still the better bet for 2010.
-
You would be wrong. No, I'm not. Edit: Stupid swear filter ruined the other part of what I wanted to say, so allow me to rephrase. You aren't smart enough to be dismissive of others opinions... especially without giving reasons why. You merely come off as an ass.
-
Only in a very technical sense. The Cubs were offered that cash for their draft slot (which they didn't plan to use). They didn't have any idea who they were going to draft for the Reds until minutes before the draft.
-
J.P. Blevins and Mike Wuertz Cubs have given up Damien Miller, Jerry Blevins, Mike Wuertz, Rob Bowen, Sean Gallagher, Eric Patterson, Josh Donaldson and Matt Murton In return they've gotten Rich Harden, Michael Barrett, Jason Kendall, Chad Gaudin, Richie Robnett, and Justin Sellers. I'd say Hendry is whupping Beane's ass right now.
-
I totally agree with you, but we have to be careful saying something good about Hendry around here. Hendry has lots of faults, but trading is probably his single biggest strength...... It certainly is... but only when he chooses the right attributes to be focusing on. Nolasco, Pinto, and Mitre for one year of Juan frickin Pierre will forever haunt me.
-
Looking at what we got back, I'm willing to give this trade a big ole thumbs up. And not that it was ever particularly likely he'd end up our starter at 1B next season anyways, but I'm very interested to see how the Cubs decide to handle the situation there after this season.
-
Tracking 2010 payroll
Rob replied to Rob's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Miles trade edited in. Still waiting on contract details for Grabow. -
Winning ballgames is what sells the tickets. The fans will always find players to dump the "face of the franchise" label onto.
-
Im interested in him, but not if Castro or Vitters are necessary to make the trade work. Id also rather keep Cashner and Jackson, but if one of them are needed to make the deal, Id be OK with it. Detroit reportedly want major league ready players. Between Fox, Fuld, Colvin, Marshall, Gorzalanny, Samardzjia, and StevensI really think we can make something happen, and wed also probably have to kick them a solid prospect like Burke, Lee, Carpenter, Castillo, Archer, or Dolis. I don't think there is much of a chance the Cubs can get Granderson without giving up any of Castro/Vitters/Cashner/Jackson . Grandersons decent, but fairly expensive, and the Tigers want to cut costs. Id offer: Jake Fox 1 of Fuld or Colvin 1 of Gorzalanny/Marshall/Shark any 1 prospect besides Vitters, Castro, Jackson, or Cashner Thats a major league ready platoon or 4th outfielder, a DH, a #4 or 5 starter and solid prospect. If they accept, good. if not, we move on. This is bat [expletive] crazy.
-
We've been through this before. Just because the phenomenon we're discussing cannot be distilled down to a column on fangraphs (Attitude WARP? Personality WARP?) doesn't disprove its existence/importance. And you're using what to "prove" its existance? Common sense? I can't prove its existence, and I've said as much. Nobody can. We can observe the anecdotal evidence, though: teams generally steer clear of these guys. You're using circular reasoning. Teams shouldn't like guys with attitude problems. We know it's true because these guys with attitude problems aren't wanted by these teams.
-
We've been through this before. Just because the phenomenon we're discussing cannot be distilled down to a column on fangraphs (Attitude WARP? Personality WARP?) doesn't disprove its existence/importance. And you're using what to "prove" its existance? Common sense?
-
Really, that's an issue to take up with The Hardball Times. They're the one who put out the tool to calculate a quick expected BABIP. Assuming the work they did was accurate, my expected lines are as well. It's a relatively simple matter to adjust those batting lines. When Perry was fired this season, the club was batting .246, a full 32 points lower than they batted in 2008, despite returning almost the same team. I'm inclined to believe there was a good deal of bad luck involved. But as to this work having future predicative value, I'd be skeptical. If Ryan Theriot was missing out on 3 hits this season, there's a lot of factors that could easily nullify that next season. Though of course the larger the difference, the more likely the player regains some of that value. Soto is obviously quite unlucky, and I'd be willing to bet he rebounds somewhat. Aaron Miles too. Maybe Fontenot. But beyond that, I'd not read too much into the results looking forward. This is merely a record of what should have happened last year.
-
Blyleven, Raines, Alomar, Larkin, and Trammell should be no doubters unless you're hung up on the spitting or coke or dutch sounding name or whatever other personal issues they may have had. McGwire absolutely deserves to be in, but I understand not voting for him based on steroid stuff. The occasional rationalization you'll see based on his lack of fielding prowess and ability to hit for average are absurd though. He's got the career value. Edgar is an interesting test case for the DH. His batting numbers are absolutely at a good enough level, but I have a hard time justifying voting for a player with absolutely no defensive value. I probably wouldn't be able to decide whether or not I'd vote for him until I actually was mailing in the ballot. Dawson is a hard case, I know in my mind that he falls in that range where he should probably be on the outside looking in, and forever be resigned to being one of the best players not in the hall... but my personal feelings would dictate I'd vote for him regardless. McGriff is in the same situation, but wouldn't get the hometown vote. Oh, and I wouldn't vote for Jack Morris if you held a gun to my head. Carlos Zambrano already has the same amount of career value, and he hasn't even turned 29 yet.
-
Is this true or a mistake? Either way, this is some great stuff. Thanks for the info! No typo. Fuld got exactly the results this season that he deserved.
-
Tracking 2010 payroll
Rob replied to Rob's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Not much. Even if you assume Grabow's deal is backloaded (let's say 3 mil this year and 4.5 next), we'd still need to fill fourteen roster spots on top of what we've got now. That's 5.6 mil if everybody was making league minimum, which they aren't. And if I'm not mistaken, we probably have a few guys getting ready to be arb-eligible.
