Rob

To be fair, I seem to remember him ranking as the most accurate according to QuesTec and all the players routinely rant and rave about how consistent his zone is. I'm talking about his stupid delay in signaling if the pitch was a strike or not Oh yeah. That was annoying.

To be fair, I seem to remember him ranking as the most accurate according to QuesTec and all the players routinely rant and rave about how consistent his zone is.

Only 31 pitches the first time through the order. We could be in trouble today. :lol:

I hate having the last post on a page in the game threads.

Before Soriano's leadoff homer today, this was his stat line on the first pitch. .493/.507/.887 I now give him permission to swing at the first pitch.

I worry that they might be too anxious and lose the little patience they have. Soriano's P/PA so far this game sucks. I know, second game in a row he helps the pitcher out by jumping all over the first pitch. He's really pissing me off with that crap. I still like when he shut me up a week or two ago when the guy in front of him got walked and I made a comment about how he needed to take a pitch or two. He promptly swung at the first pitch and hit a 3-run HR. He did something similar to me earlier in the year too.

I worry that they might be too anxious and lose the little patience they have. Soriano's P/PA so far this game sucks.

Tie game.

Wow... Lou is intentionally walking somebody to get to Nady in the first inning. And it loaded the bases... while the wind is blowing out. Does Lou realize that we're already holding the division lead? Our only job is to not lose it, which means we need to stop taking unneeded risks.

If I had wheels I'd have been a bus. If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

I'd be happier if they had a three-man rotation with tandem starters and just a few relievers, to give us more position players off the bench.

ESPN is just showing ESPN News instead of the game... It's like I'm blacked out, but I'm not on a satellite system, and I'm not anywhere near close enough to Chicago to get WCIU. Something better be fixed.

That's assuming Hendry isn't stupid enough to non-tender him.

I'd have to assume that moving Marmol to the rotation would free us up to trade Marshall for an upgrade elsewhere. SS and RF seem most likely. Tejada, Marmol (SP), and Wuertz in a setup role, or Theriot, Marshall, and Marmol (RP). Obviously it would cost more than Marshall to get Tejada, but if we aren't giving up too much else, it seems very obvious which option is better for us.

It most certainly was in 2002. Pretty much the exact same situation Z never had a year like Marmol did out of the pen this year. I believe they feel comfortable with their 5 starters this year, I can't say the same thing about '02's staff. Zambrano doesn't have the same pure stuff as Marmol and they're different style pitchers. I think Marmol will maximize his effectiveness as a properly used reliever compared to a starter. Wainwright last year was more effective as a reliever than a starter this year, I expect similar declines in Marmol (although, Marmol has better stuff than Wainwright as well) as a starter to the point where the difference between him and Marshall isn't worth the loss of him as a properly used reliever. Effectiveness aside, Wainright has been good enough in a far larger number of innings, which allows his overall value to be much, much higher. Nobody thinks that Marmol will post a sub 2 era as a starter... but he only needs to be a bit above league average to be more useful considering the bump in innings.

He has less of an injury history than Marshall, and you don't see anybody supporting Marshall going to the pen.

Dempster's actually faced tougher batters (by .004 points of OPS)

Actually, I will conceed that if it hurts one of the opposing players with great range and forces him out of the game, the double would possibly be better than the dinger... It'd have to be the sort of injury that forces Daryle Ward to play center or something though.

There's no way Marmol shouldn't be starting next year.

Hell, I'd say Marmol has been more valuable than Theriot and he's only a reliever who wasn't even in the bigs in April. Marmol has a WARP3 of 4.3, while Theriot has a 3.7... and that doesn't even account for Marmol's much higher leverage. WARP for pitchers is leverage adjusted. Well sorta. It's a [expletive] way but it is. BP really has a disaster on their hands with WARP for pitchers. Its too bad theyre too dumb to know it oh and in addition, Marmol's leverage isnt all that high for a reliever. It really isnt. Thats Lous fault more than anything. I just looked it up. 53rd in the NL. Seems like it should be a lot higher.

Yeah, but if we had held onto Maddux, we could have offered him arbitration. Worst case scenario, we sign him for a bit too much money. Best case, he declines and we get compensation picks that were worth more than Izturis. We weren't in a situation where we really had to get rid of Maddux for any return we could get. This was a case where holding onto him was better than the return we got. I think once the BIS numbers come out (which plot exactly where the ball was hit, how hard, what vector, etc... and compare his range to the other SS) it will vindicate my belief that he makes more easy plays than most, but very few outside the normal range. Unfortunately, those numbers wont come out until after the season, so I must delay gratification until then. Though again, I must disagree with the clubhouse chemistry argument. Winning breeds chemistry on a team, not the other way around. For proof of this, you have to look no further than the Cardinals this year. These were supposedly all clubhouse guys with great attitudes when they won the world series, but all I've been hearing all season is about how miserable that locker room has been. Being a "proven winner" doesn't do much when you aren't winning. ARod increases the Cubs likelyhood of reaching the playoffs (and getting far enough into it), that we'd get the ticket income from a potential extra 19 games at 100% capacity. Plus the merchandising that comes with national media coverage. I know it's counterintuitive, but I've got about three different books with studies on the matter. It's pretty incontrovertible. Well, of course you're gonna try to go opposite field if the pitcher is going outside on you. I'd still rather attempt to hit a drive down the line or in the gap, but I'm not about to complain if the end result is a weak grounder that moves the runner up. The problem is only when a player's sole aim that at bat is to hit a weak grounder to 2B, and it's early enough in a game that you shouldn't be playing for one run. Earl Weaver had a rule that "if you play for one run, that's all you're going to get." And that still holds mostly true. If we're facing an offense like the Reds', who can explode for 10-12 runs, we shouldn't be trying to get just a single run early in the game. I wont complain about a run, but the approach isn't ideal unless certain conditions are met. First round is on me if you find yourself in the Chicago area.

Given the state of the pitching market this offseason, I think he's gonna end up with a Lilly-esque contract.

Hell, I'd say Marmol has been more valuable than Theriot and he's only a reliever who wasn't even in the bigs in April. Marmol has a WARP3 of 4.3, while Theriot has a 3.7... and that doesn't even account for Marmol's much higher leverage.

Before I even start on this post, I should probably mention that I'm not intending to "pile on" with the rest of the people mocking you for pulling "the card." I do respect that you have a much more keen insight on the actual personalities of the players than those of us who are just watching the games. This is not meant to come off as condescending, I'm just trying to start an earnest discussion. I don't think anybody here is about to start debating that scouts have a wealth of information available to them that the rest of us don't. I think the trick is just in realizing exactly how much extra credence we should give their opinions. If Gary Hughes thinks taking a flier out on Jason Kendall is a good idea, sometimes that'll work out. But if he tried to convince us to resign him to a three year deal at five mil a year, he'd be past the limit of his credibility. This is just one where the number crunchers had a better grasp on the game than the scouts. Again, the trick is in acquiring all the information possible, which allows somebody to make the best decision possible. Stats and scouts. This one kinda hinges on the definition of "solid." As far as the numbers are concerned, they really do tell the whole story as far as offensive output for players goes. Theriot is well below average with the bat, even for a shortstop. No amount of situational hitting is going to be enough to change that. Defensively, the numbers wont be out until after the season (and are less reliable anyways), but Theriot obviously is severely lacking in range and his arm strength is mediocre at best. He is an excellent baserunner, however. All in all, the total package rates as below average. He's not hurting us all that much (and we don't have any better options anyways), but he's not helping either. Is that "solid" or not? As far as the fact he's played on a lot of championship teams, shouldn't the team get credit for that, not the player? The other guys on the teams he was on were certainly having a lot more to do with their success than he did. The general talent level of this team puts us in the position where each marginal win gains us quite a bit of money (in terms of likely postseason revenues, as well as merchandising and other forms of income). Signing a guy like ARod in the offseason would essentially cost us a lot less than it would if the Royals signed him for the exact same amount of money, since he would bring in much more for us. And seeing as how SS is the only position this offseason where there will be readily available (and very large) upgrades, I see no reason not to peg Theriot as the guy that should be on the way to the bench. It's nothing personal, as he seems like a very affable fellow, but business-wise, it's the right decision to make assuming the cost is right. That's what we call circular reasoning. They do it, so it must be important. And it's important, cause, otherwise, why would they do it? It's a logical fallacy. The fact of the matter is that, while it can certainly come in handy to have advanced the runner to third, it's not really essential in the truest sense of the word. If Theriot were a better hitter, he could be trying to pull the ball and hit it in the gap or over the wall. Hitting a groundout to the right side decreases overall run expectancy for the inning, while only giving a slight bump to the odds of scoring a single run in the inning. The only time it can be considered remotely essential is in the late innings of a one-run game, where the decrease in run expectancy is covered for by the increase of win expectancy. And I do thank you for being willing to share your experiences here on the board. It'd be nice if we were on the same page tactically, but it's hardly essential to a rational discourse. I hope to work in the business someday myself, and the ability to pick your brain is greatly appreciated.

With all due respect, I would appreciate it if you responded to my well thought out post on page five, rather than simply going after the people who acted childish.