Rob

Just to point something out, Ron. Most statheads, including myself, would rather have the 1987 version of Ozzie Smith than any current incarnation of Miguel Tejada we've seen.

Yeah, I'd appreciate it if you could find that.

I trust them more than Range Factor or UZR. What do you use?

Actually, I'm fairly convinced one of my giant tomes sitting on the bookshelf came to the opposite conclusion... though it was quite a close outcome. I suppose tomorrow I'll get to digging through the books and trying to figure out how they came to that conclusion. I don't want to hijack this thread and I don't know what book you have, but I think it's wrong. And I'm pretty sure Tango Tiger and Bill James agree with me. The folks at FJM have this in their definition of OPS: I'm not going to take the time to search for more support at this point, like I said, I don't want to hijack the thread, but I just wanted to point that out. Oh, I'm certainly not convinced of it either. I was just trying to point out it's still occassionally disputed in logical terms. IIRC, the study was something to the effect of team SLG historically having a higher correlation with winning percentage than OBP alone... though neither way attempted to control the influence of other factors. Personally, I tend to go with EqA when I can be bothered to look it up.

Garcia's 87 MPH fastball just screams "paging Doctor Andrews" to me... I want to be nowhere near him.

FRAR and FRAA... you can probably grab them over at baseballprospectus without needing a subscription.

His defense in LF is average at best. In CF he would be among the NL's worst defenders. The only fielding stat I trust has him coming in at 12 runs better than the average LF... a very significant margin.

Actually, I'm fairly convinced one of my giant tomes sitting on the bookshelf came to the opposite conclusion... though it was quite a close outcome. I suppose tomorrow I'll get to digging through the books and trying to figure out how they came to that conclusion.

If he's hurt, then he collects. If he retires, then he does not. I had figured as much. In that case, I buy myself a lot of tequila and see what happens in 2008.

What do you mean? Like having foresight?

The best baseball is played by the best players... and Ramirez has shown time and time again his legs can't stand a 162 game season. Why put unnecessary stress on those legs? Whether I'm a Cubs fan or just a baseball fan in general, I'd rather see the best players out there than guys like Jose Macias... even if it means Aramis doesn't run out a meaningless grounder in an already lost game. Small cost occassionally for a big gain over the course of a season... seems like a no brainer to me. And in response to your question, it's extremely illogical. It's akin to having found out you're paralyzed from the waist down... and being most upset that you can't wiggle your toes anymore. The only reason you feel the way you do is some sort of emotional attachment. While emotional attachment isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's most certainly illogical in this case. No. There really wasn't anything wrong with what Rowand did then. Bases loaded and two outs... he saved a bases clearing double, even if it was only the first inning. But I sure wouldn't want him doing that when you're already down 10 runs in the ninth. One nice play can cost him and his team a lot. Fluke or whatever you want to call it, without his hustle it wouldn't have happened. There's simply no debate. I don't see anybody on my side of the fence proclaiming that hustle is always horrible. Why are you so bloody adamant that it's always good? Are you even willing to admit there's an obvious tradeoff in health?

I'm not sure on this... does he have to make an attempt to play in order to collect on the remainder of his contract? I do remember Mo Vaughn was in "rehab" for his knees for a few years, presumably to collect his paychecks. Just wondering...

So you're saying that the biggest problem isn't the one that angers you most? That's a rather illogical route to take... even for a fellow Cubs fan. So what you're trying to say is that in the bottom of the ninth, in a 15-4 rout... Aramis should be hustling out routine grounders to first? Hustle is just like anything else. Too much is counterproductive. Ask Aaron Rowand.

I think the Cubs need to sign a top FA pitcher (Schmidt). I think there are cheaper FA position players that could help the Cubs (Durham, C. Wilson). I think the impact bat is going to have to come from a trade. there aren't many pitchers out there either and they are even riskier. I would rather build an 850 run lineup and then worry about pitching. Yeah, but is Soriano going to be a help or a hindrance towards an 850 run lineup? He'd most likely help, but not for what we'd have to pay him. I'd rather sink less money into Trot Nixon and Craig Wilson as platoonmates and slide Murton into a platoon with Jacque in right, which would also give us a big bat off the bench and another decent bat off the bench at any given moment... something we've been sorely missing for a long time. Edit: Of course, that thought is predicated upon viewing Soriano as a LF. If he's a 2B, it could be quite different. Though I do still find myself more inclined to grab Nixon/Wilson and Durham to fill out the holes.

You did say that nothing angers you more than not hustling. As a paying fan, I feel I'm entitled to a quality product... especially considering the cash I've doled out over the years. I'm sure you probably feel the same. Now if what you said earlier was really true, you'd be less offended by a team full of Juan Pierre's than a team of Adam Dunn's. I don't believe that for a second. You and I both know you'd be happier with the team if it was winning than if it wasn't. Hustle aside, you watch the games for the giddy feeling that a winning ballclub can give you. Sure, it'd be wonderful if there was hustle... but it's just the icing on the cake. So if you don't want people to offend you with comparisons like Dunn versus Pierre, don't offend us with asinine rhetoric about lack of hustle being the biggest problem around. It's the lack of a quality product being put before us that has everybody on edge, and I'll call you a liar if you claim it to be anything else.

What do they gain besides making people "feel better?" It's completely arbritary as to whether or not "hustling" would actually change plays significantly and often enough to alter a team's season or even the game being played at the time. Actually reaching or gaining an extra base if a fielder commits a mistake? That's possible even if a fielder doesn't commit a mistake. If Aramis really isn't hustling because he's afraid of injury, he needs to get a trainer this offseason. Aramis not hustling isn't on my top 10 list of Cub problems. Agreed. I can think of at least 10 bigger problems. 1. Dusty 2. Hendry 3. MacPhail 4. Rusch's production and contract 5. Izturis 6. Rothschild 7. A severe lack of a genuine #2-type starter. Somebody has to slot in between Z and Hill. 8. Distinct inability to develop position players. 9. Cedeno's bat and the fact that it wont play at second. 10. Our training staff can't keep anybody healthy. And I didn't even mention Jeff Gordon's singing... blech.

I'd take Earl Weaver over a computer anyday.

Juan Pierre has been doing that. Exactly. We already knew he'd do nothing useful before we got him. Thank you for pointing out how even when he'd doing what's expected of him, he belongs nowhere near a major league squad. It's a very important point.

I don't want either of these guys even whiffing Murton or Pie's jocks.

This team is built around having loads of above average but nowhere near exceptional relievers. Krivsky would probably sign a deal with the devil for chunks of our bullpen... and he'd almost certainly give up Dunn. Seriously, Krivsky's reliever fetish boarders on the criminal.

I'm more afraid of the number of picks the Cubs will lose. Again. Well I guess that depends how they approach this offseason. If we try to make a bunch of FA signings in a weak attempt to win next year, we could lose some. I'd really be in favor of trying a quick "rebuild" where we accept some mediocracy next year in hopes of making a stronger effort in 2008. Also even if we did go after some FAs that cost us picks it could turn out like: Gain bottom 15 first rounder and supp. for Pierre Lose a 2nd and 3rd rounder for OF and P We have the same number of picks, just make the first three within the first 40ish picks ,instead of top 70-80. If the Cubs go into free agency looking to win next season, I don't see how Hendry will pass on re-signing Juan Pierre. even if they go the free agent route i think pierre will be offered a contract. Let's just pray the Nats retain Bowden at least through the beginning of free agency. If I know drunks, and I do... he should be gunning for Pierre and willing to blow his entire payroll on him.

No, I'm not missing the point. I'm happy he's gone too because I want the Cubs to win. But to keep demeaning the man is cruel and frankly, it's not the right thing to do. Look at yourself in the mirror. I'll bet you all are the type that make fun of people behind their backs, and wouldn't have the guts to talk to them face to face with them. I came to this thread to make a point.....I could give a flying flip what you think of me coming into this thread. Through all the slam Nefi threads, I have said very little. At least you all had the humanity to wish Glendon well with his medical condition. You all have the last word. Actually, I'm rather well known around these parts for telling people things to their faces. And if I met Neifi, it'd be no different. He simply isn't a good player. No amount of crying about human decency can change that. Now if you're a closet Neifi fan, that's fine. But whining about the people who recognize him for the scrub that he is... it's just silly.

You think Chris Duncan is going to be a superstar too? When Murton came into the league, nothing supported the power stroke he showed for a few months. Color me skeptical, but I've been a Cubs fan too long to hope for improvement when it's not obvious they had mastered that much of the skill in the first place. Chris Duncan has nothing to do with this conversation. You could say that for any prospect. Murton is 6'1", 220 lbs. He gets really good bat speed with a powerful, compact stroke. The only reason he isn't hitting more home runs is that he's not lifting the ball very often. In fact, were Murton to have enough AB's to qualify for the batting title, he'd be 3rd in MLB in GB/FB ratio. I don't see any reason to think that he can't shift that ratio as he matures as a hitter to generate some more fly balls. If he does that, I strongly believe he can be an annual 25+ HR hitter, with several 30+ seasons mixed in. I mentioned earlier that I think he has plenty of natural power. I also think he was using it flukishly in his first season. He hit a HR every 20 at bats. His rate this year is a bit better than one every 40. Is he certainly capable of good HR totals? Yes, he is. Do I think he's going to change his approach drastically enough to become a legitimate power threat? No, I don't. But I certainly wouldn't complain if he did.

How is Edmonds going to improve over 120 OPS points? Is that for the 50 games he's healthy for next season? How the hell does BP get that for his PECOTA for next year? Anybody who thinks he'll be at those numbers is a fool. First off, I already pointed out it predicted 515 PA... so it'd probably be more than 50 games. 10+ PA a game is more unrealistic than that PECOTA line. The 2007 PECOTA was taken from his preseason five year forecast. Obviously it's going to be adjusted downward somewhat when they run his numbers again after the season, though I sincerely doubt he'll do worse than about .260/.360/.500 even if in limited playing time. Mostly, I see his defensive value suffering. Honestly, I'm not too high on picking up Edmonds for CF. Wells is available, or we could make a positive from a bad signing by moving Jones to CF (even at less production than Edmonds or Wells, he'd be good value-wise). Summarily dismissing Edmonds without so much as a thought is the sort of move this team cannot afford, however. If he makes the team better and comes cheaply, Hendry better be standing there with his checkbook in the non-donut hand.

You think Chris Duncan is going to be a superstar too? When Murton came into the league, nothing supported the power stroke he showed for a few months. Color me skeptical, but I've been a Cubs fan too long to hope for improvement when it's not obvious they had mastered that much of the skill in the first place.