Rob

Cabrera and his .966 Fielding % (hey, if you can use it I can.) versus Nomar and his .957? That's a margin of less than one error. And you've already established that the scorekeepers can be vindictive (which is half the reason Nomar was traded). For all intents and purposes, Cabrera didn't do any better than Nomar that year... and they were both below the league average fielding percentage. I thought judging someone on their defensive% was a horrible way to judge a player? :D It's not. But with your baseball experience, I'm sure you realize it's somewhat more applicable for shortstops than catchers. The SS position is the most demanding positions on the field. I was just joking with the guy anyways. I like to judge a player by his defensive %, but some dont. Then what is your justification for saying that Cabrera was that much better than Nomar that Boston wouldn't have won the title with him at SS. I dont have the stats In front of me, but I remember reading something about Cabrera committing very few errors(4 I believe)when he was traded to the Red Sox. Mientkiewicz also contributed to helping out the infield defense. Cabrera had eight errors in fifty seven games at short. Pokey Reese had six in seventy one games. Now this is an honest question I can't remember the answer to, what happened to Pokey that year? Did he get injured or something?

Cabrera and his .966 Fielding % (hey, if you can use it I can.) versus Nomar and his .957? That's a margin of less than one error. And you've already established that the scorekeepers can be vindictive (which is half the reason Nomar was traded). For all intents and purposes, Cabrera didn't do any better than Nomar that year... and they were both below the league average fielding percentage. I thought judging someone on their defensive% was a horrible way to judge a player? :D Forgive me. I'm trying to bring this information down to a level you've shown aptitude for understanding. Believe me, it's applicable at the higher levels of statistics in this case as well.

Cabrera and his .966 Fielding % (hey, if you can use it I can.) versus Nomar and his .957? That's a margin of less than one error. And you've already established that the scorekeepers can be vindictive (which is half the reason Nomar was traded). For all intents and purposes, Cabrera didn't do any better than Nomar that year... and they were both below the league average fielding percentage.

Ok, tell ya what. We'll give you that passed ball back. We'll give you half of all his passed balls the last 3 years back. He is still no longer an defensive asset anymore.

And I haven't? :roll: If that were the case you wouldn't embarass yourself with the following items: Only in certain (and rare) situations is sacrificing an out for advancing the runner going to contribute positively to win expectancy. Almost all of the cases are late in the game with a run differential of one or zero, no outs, and runners already in scoring position. Well it certainly isn't good. But does having one crappy defensive player exclude teams from postseason glory? Absolutely not. The Red Sox made it as far as they did in 04 due to Manny and Ortiz, not despite them. Only if you can make it to the postseason. There's such a turnover in pitching in-season due to injuries league-wide, that it's near impossible to keep a pitching staff intact and healthy for an entire 162 game schedule. The rate of pitching injuries trumps that of injuries for position players. A good offensive squad with pitching that fluctuates from average when healthy to bad when injuries strike is much more likely to make it to the postseason than a team with bad offense, but pitching that fluctuates from good when healthy to average when bad. It's simple. Just look at the permutations. Team A can have the following situations occur: Good Offense - Average Pitching Good Offense - Bad Pitching Team B can have these: Bad Offense - Good Pitching Bad Offense - Average Pitching With the offense being better, the team has the stability necessary to make it to the postseason more often. Just look to the pitching rich and injury riddled Cubs if you wish to make the situation hit closer to home. That's the one smart thing you've said so far.

That is because he packed on a couple of pounds since then. Bengie had a 3.55 CERA last year. 3rd best in all of baseball. Barrett had a 4.45 CERA last year. Isn't a 32yo. C that has been gaining too much weight for his own good a red flag? He isn't quick behind the plate and has been terrible at throwing out runners. He has thrown out 17.5% of the runners. Molina has a 4.55 CERA this year. Barrett is at 4.57. Although, I really don't like that stat. One thing that coaches would tell that they dont like about Molina is the number of pass balls he allows. Im not sure what his numbers are this year in that category, but last year he allowed 10 with the Angels. That can be contributed to the number of pitchers like K-Rod who throw alot of balls in the dirt. Whoa! Hold the train! Passed Balls are only committed when the ball doesn't hit the dirt before it gets to the catcher. Otherwise it's a Wild Pitch. Watch the games and you might know that.

I'd bet good money I've watched more baseball games than you. I caught every single Cubs game that was on WGN, CSN, ESPN, or Fox in 04 and 05, and whatever games I could find on MLBTV. Granted, I've slipped back to slightly in excess of a hundred games so far this year... but I don't doubt that beats you handily irregardless. Do you know what the difference between a .275 and a .300 hitter is? It's one hit every other week. There's a decent difference in the value of these two players, and I'd bet dollars to dimes you couldn't pick the one hitting better more than 50% of the time if you simply watched all the games and never looked at the statistics. The human brain just isn't set to function like you imply it is. You remember the big things, the important moments. You don't remember the guy hitting .300 getting the single in the top of the 4th with nobody on and two out. You remember the guy hitting .275 getting the single with the bases loaded in the 9th, two outs, and down by one. The fact of the matter is that 162 games is far too long for your mind to develop an accurate mental account of it all... especially what you saw back in the second week of May. Statistics aren't a substitute for the game. They're simply the only way to get an accurate portrait of what has happened...the stuff that your mind no longer can be counted on for. Now if you can't grasp the meaning of certain statistics... if you're scared of all the complex math that goes into them... don't use them. But certainly don't automatically assume that people that are fully capable of using them have only seen baseball inside a laboratory setting. I watch baseball. I know it damn well. But just because you don't know what we're talking about, suddenly I'm a stats geek who never watches the games? Puhleaze. Oh, and interestingly enough... That hypothetical situation you alluded to earlier? It's often measured using Run Expectancy or Win Expectancy... both of which I look at in determining the value of a player. Just because Darin Erstad does those things doesn't make him a viable option at first base, though. Even after those adjustments, he's one of the worst first basemen in the league.

No they are not. Let me guess, you're going to be using VORP and that other garbage to judge Molina? Stats dont tell you everything. Playing and watching are 2 different things. I hate it when people just use some meaningless stats like VORP to judge a player. Average, Hr, RBI's, OBP, and fielding% are a good way to judge a player in my book. Was your book written by a children's author?

Reputations are worth nothing. Give me proof he's even a shadow of his former self behind the plate or I'll continue to believe he's worthless. And I don't even know where to begin with the 162 game averages you've given. Maybe if we were looking for career value it'd be a worthwhile exercise, but career numbers have very little to do with predicting success the next year. Three year splits, on the other hand... are much more valuable for this exercise. Their three year splits are as follows... from 2004 to so far through 2006 .285/.322/.433 .289/.351/.494 That's a pretty huge difference. And it even includes Molina's career year too, so saying it's skewed because of Barrett this year isn't an applicable argument. Trying to put Molina and Barrett on equal offensive grounds is a ridiculous attempt. I've made no such attempt to put them on equal defensive grounds, even though the gap is much smaller in that regard (a mere 9 runs this year on defense, as opposed to the 20 run difference on offense)

When was that made? He was batting .325/.396/.578 with 5 HRs already by the end of April.

You're right. I forgot to check his contract status... it's a 7.5 million dollar option that'll be declined. He'll probably make about 5. Either way, it's not an insignificant amount. In 2002 and 2003 Bengie may have deserved a gold glove. I've got him coming in at 12 runs over average each year. 2004 he comes in at three below. Yeah, that looks like it might be a statistical anomaly... a sample size issue or something. He had done well in the prior seasons. 2005 he comes in at four below. It certainly decreases the odds that both years are anomalous. 2006 as we've established puts him at eight below average. The pattern has been irrefutably established. He is no longer an above average defensive catcher... and he's getting worse at an alarming rate. And those offensive numbers you posted are thoroughly unimpressive. The only reason he's amassed 15 HR and 46 RBI is that he's been trotted out there for 384 at bats. If Henry Blanco had the same number of at bats this year, he'd have 12 HR and 62 RBI. Playing time isn't the same thing as production... and his .315 OBP is not acceptible production... at least not on an offensive squad as weak as the Cubs already are. Maybe the Red Sox could hide a guy like him in the lineup... but the Cubs can't afford the downgrade. The only argument you've made that I can't refute with numbers is his ability to call a game. And you've got nothing to back up that claim either.

The word that I've heard is that Toronto is going to up their payroll in 2007. $100 million is the current rumour. And don't get me wrong, I love Wells... but he's not worth Barrett. Especially considering the fact we could probably get him for Izturis, Pie, and a live arm. Why give up one of the top players at his position for Wells when you can divest yourself of Izturis for the mere cost of an exceptionally talented, but far from sure thing prospect? I don't see Toronto wanting Izturis back. I think it would take 2 very good pitching prospects and Pie. Have you looked at their middle infield situation? The Cubs have a bad middle infield, but Toronto's puts it to shame.

Fox is one of the top catching prospects in the minors.

He's gotten progressively worse in the field each of the last three seasons... with this season coming in at eight runs below average. Added to the fact that his only offensive advantage over Blanco is about 15 points of OBP, and you have a no-offense/no-defense waste of a roster spot and about 8 million bucks. And let's not forget the aging curve for catchers on the wrong side of thirty. Precipitous declines are the norm, not the exception. Bengie Molina is not a good baseball player, will not become one soon, and should not be treated like one. If you want to say Wells and Soto is a better option than Barrett and Pierre, that could be defensible. But bringing Molina into the discussion is not.

I've got him as being 12 runs above average last year and six so far this year... and Barrett at -11 and -17 in that same span. :sick:

Are you serial? Buffet Boy has already got the contract extension drawn up! Sadly, I don't doubt he has. Thankfully, I think the pressure will be too much on him to offer it to Captain Toothpick. And I suppose you should know... I am super-dooper serial.

he does have a world series ring. while that does not necessarily make him a good manager, it does mean he's not a bad one imo. Dusty got very very close to a couple, and he's absolutely horrid. Brenly made some really stupid decisions in that series, too. They won despite his managing... not because of it.

The word that I've heard is that Toronto is going to up their payroll in 2007. $100 million is the current rumour. And don't get me wrong, I love Wells... but he's not worth Barrett. Especially considering the fact we could probably get him for Izturis, Pie, and a live arm. Why give up one of the top players at his position for Wells when you can divest yourself of Izturis for the mere cost of an exceptionally talented, but far from sure thing prospect?

I guess an interesting question I haven't seen anybody ask yet is this... "Is Soriano going to demand to play 2B when he signs his contract?" If you'll recall, he threw a huge tantrum when told he was being moved to the outfield. He was a second baseman, and he'd have nothing to do with becoming an outfielder, and so on and so forth. His production has increased since moving to the outfield, though I'm convinced the mitigating factor was the contract year and not the position switch. I guess if he still sees himself as a misplaced second baseman, we could see him demanding to whichever team he signs with that they use him as a second baseman and not an outfielder, if he still feels so strongly. Have there been any indications he's truly happy now that he's made the switch? If not, I'd be a lot more excited about him coming to Chicago.

Even with his defense progressing as much as it has, nobody in baseball seems him ending up as anything other than a DH within a couple years. This improvement might just buy them 1-2 years as a LF'er while they let Sweeney's contract run out. At any rate though, his bat projects to be upper-tier if not elite for a DH. So yeah, he's doing pretty well for himself.

I don't really want Soriano near this team unless he's playing 2B. Otherwise, he's not even remotely worth the money he'll be receiving. But it shouldn't be an issue at any rate. If anybody's expecting Hendry to do anything other than drink too much, wait too long, and make a move at that coyote ugly last call... you're in for as rude an awakening as he is.

The one positive to take away from this is that, barring a horrible miracle, Dusty will not win enough games to keep his job. We did have a nice stretch about a month ago where people were still cooking up half-baked ways to get to the playoffs, or at least a .500 record. Aint none of that happening now.

That approach is every bit as old as Rob Deer.

And Goodbye to the fantasy league championship... :cry:

I'd love to get him, but I think we can all agree there's a 98% chance he ends up in Seattle or in pinstripes.