EastonBlues22

Enjoy the ride? Yeah, but my head hurts now something fierce. 117 pages? You just read all 117 pages? Dude... TT posted some interesting pictures over at GatewayRedbirds so I had to come back over here and pick up where I left off...somewhere around page 27...to find out what you guys were up to. It was a great read.

Enjoy the ride? Yeah, but my head hurts now something fierce.

I'm posting just so that the record shows I made it entirely through this mountain of a thread. :lol:

The man deserves it. [petty Cubs fan] Anything to keep a Cardinal from winning an award [/petty Cubs fan] You do know that Howard was born and raised in STL, right? :P

Why pitchers continue to challenge him inside when he's so locked in defies any amount of common sense. He has trouble (relatively speaking) hitting pitches high and away, and low and away...pitch to his weaknesses and if he gets himself out, great. If not, at least you're not pitching like an idiot.

I think that could be the case. I think Hendry would make an excellent scout or director of scouting. I think he lacks the ability to make a good GM. Isn't one of the major current complaints against Hendry/management the fact he has repeatedly overlooked qualities like a player's ability to get on base/demonstrate a disciplined approach at the plate/hit for power when putting together his team? Is that really the sort of guy that you want in charge of analyzing and determining which talent is drafted by the organization?

And speaking up would have cemented his innocence? Like Palmeiro...who did fail a steroid test? He's already guilty in the court of public perception, so people interpret his silence as an indictment against his innocence. Nobody really suspected Palmeiro, so they interpreted his passionate denials as proof of his innocence. If that Congressional farce illustrated anything, it's that the perceptions of people color their interpretations of events... Bonds neither admitted his "guilt," nor admitted to cheating. Ironically, the dates of accusation listed in that grand jury are too late for them to have influenced Bonds' record setting 2001 campaign. So: 1) There's no record of Bonds being convicted on any charge. 2) There's no evidence against him whatsoever in the years leading up to his most controversial campaign. 3) Even if you assume his guilt, that in no way changes the fact that Howard might be using undetectable substances as well...a fact that everyone seems to be conveniently ignoring. Back to assumptions...I think I've made my point. That's fine, you're entitled to your opinion. For my part, I'm glad that MLB disagrees with that sentiment.

Good post. Elaborating on that a little bit, if you have an average baserunning team, and improve its baserunning by just 1 run worth per position per year, that's about a one win diference in the standings right there. If you have a below average running team and retool it into an above average one, you might be talking about as many as 4 wins. Not much, but more than I would have guessed.

How can a baseball stadium favor a hitter over a pitcher as far as walks go? That's all on the ump, the building the game is played in has nothing to do with it. Park factors doesn't necessarily measure just "the park" itself. It's calculated by formulas such as: PF = ((homeRS + homeRA)/(homeG)) / ((roadRS + roadRA)/(roadG)). Basically, it compares a team's performance level (and it's competition's) at home over the course of the year against the performance level in all away games. Now, if certain stadiums have been easier to get a walk in this year, it will tell you that...but it won't necessarily explain why. The fact remains, though, that it has been easier to draw walks in certain stadiums than it has been in others for whatever reason.

I don't think this is true at all. Even the Maris family has said that if Howard hits 62 they acknowledge him as the champ Bonds, Sosa, and McGuire have never failed a test. Now, maybe they used materials/suplements that were legal at the time (Andro), or that were just difficult to test for. However, their testing record is just as clean as Howard's is. What makes everyone so sure that Howard isn't using materials/supplements that are difficult to test for, or that are legal now? The simply answer is we can't be sure. We believe the others are guilty because we want to believe it. We believe Howard is innocent because we want to believe it. The record has no asterisk...apologies to the Maris family.

ESPN's headline after last night's game: "Howard's 54th Homer Rallies Phillies Past Mets" The solo HR came in the 3rd inning, and was the only RBI Howard had in a game where Philly scored 14 runs. Not to mention, Philly had 3 other HRs later in the game...all of those with people on. Truly, Howard's must have been the blow that made the difference. I think the media is plenty aware.

He has been shut down indefinitely with a hip problem. As far as I know, there is no timetable for his return.

Well said. While I'm saying intelligent things, I'll also note that Beltran has had a really, really good year, and Miguel Cabrera happens to be #2 in VORP to Pujols. Both those guys have an OPS of 1.000 playing half their games in a pitchers' park. So, it'll likely be Howard or Pujols, but two other NL guys have been truly great this year as well. New Busch is #24 currently in ESPNs Park Factors at .937...Shea is #26 at .930, and Dolphins Stadium is #30 at .867. Of the three parks, Busch is the only one that doesn't favor hitters in any of the five categories (Shea favors hitters in 2Bs and BBs, Dolphin Stadium in 3Bs and BBs). Shea and New Busch are very comparable parks right now. Your point does stand with Cabrera...although, it's interesting to note that New Busch and Dolphins stadium are #24 and #25 respectively in Park Factors for HRs (.869 and .861 respectively). The argument usually goes that if Miggy played in a more HR friendly park, then his power #s would be better. I agree in concept, but New Busch is just as HR repellant as Dolphins, so that shouldn't be hurting Miggy's numbers relative to Pujols' any...only in gross totals. In my opinion, you've nailed the top four candidates in this thread...the award is definitely still up for grabs.

Well said.

This is a myth, and it is simply not true. The relative production of the Phillies and Cards at every batting slot (Phillies cumulative OPS in the slot - Cards cumulative OPS): A positive number favors PHI, an negative one the Cards. 1: .101 2: .207 3: -.247 4: -.018 5: .087 6: .058 7: .092 8: -.051 We'll ignore the #3 and #4 slots because that's where Pujols and Howard reside and this is to see what the rest of their teams are doing. Of the remaining 6 slots...PHI has the clear advantage in five of them. Average all 6 and you get a .082 advantage to Philly...that's right, about 80 OPS points at every other slot in the order besides #3, and #4. That's significant. Of the 5 slots where they are better, PHI averages a dominating .109 OPS advantage over their Cards counterparts. The one slot that swings in the Cards favor is the #8 slot...the least important out of all of them...and it favors the Cards at a rate less than half what the other five slots favor PHI. I have found absolutely no argument based on numbers that the Phillies would be worse off without Howard than the Cards would be without Pujols. The rest of their PHI's supporting cast is just that much better offensively than what the Cards have.

Why? Looking at FRAR/VORP, Pujols is about two full marginal wins (9 to 7) better than Howard is, at the same position, even with the decreased playing time. Even if you throw out the FRAR and ignore defense completely, Pujols still has the higher VORP by about half a game. In a close race, shouldn't the player who contributes more to his team come out ahead of the guy who plays more games? :wink: Just teasing...I understand your point. I'm really looking forward to the next month as the MVP and playoff races sort themselves out. IMO, this is one of the most exciting baseball Septembers in recent memory.

I bet if Pujols were having the great second half, you'd have argued differently :D Possibly, I am only human, but Pujols tends to be very consistent from half to half...and even from month to month. With his injury this year, it's a bit different, but the last five years he's never been a player that started slow and finished strong or vice versa. I don't think there's ever really been a chance to even use that argument in favor of him. Howard: 591 AB, 105 R, 183 H, 21 2B, 62 HR, 158 RBI .403/.665/1.068 174 AB with RISP, 284 AB with runners on projected over the same # of ABs... Pujols: 591 AB, 136 R, 190 H, 50 2B, 58 HR, 155 RBI .423/.681/1.104 139 AB with RISP, 267 AB with runners on Same ridiculous pace, but he's giving better production with more limited opportunities. Anyway, I'm not here to start a Pujols for MVP campaign on a Cubs board... Howard and Pujols are having very similar seasons. Howard has the better supporting offensive cast around him, Pujols' team benefits from better pitching. If both teams make the playoffs, you could make a great case for either player...both would be deserving. Howard will probably get more votes because nobody expected his team to be there whereas everyone thought the Cards would be much better. Nevermind the rather disappointing record falls almost exclusively on the shoulders of the pitching staff...voters will still think the Cards underachieved and associate Pujols with that. That's ok, Howard will still be deserving. If the Phils don't make it but the Cards do, and Howard still gets it, I'll probably be a lot more disturbed by the outcome.

I give Howard extra credit for carrying the Phillies back into the wild card chase despite trading away Abreu and Lidle. Numbers since the All-Star break: Pujols: 328/405/639/1044; 37 runs, 13 HR, 38 RBI Howard: 359/491/793/1284; 43 runs, 24 HR, 62 RBI Add in the fact that Pujols has played 17 games fewer than Howard, and I say that gives Howard a slight edge over Pujols. One of Howard's most remarkable numbers is his HR/F - home runs per outfield fly ball. 38.3% of his fly balls to the outfield end up as HRs. The next highest figures are Travis Hafner at 30.7% and David Ortiz at 26.3%. Why are the numbers post ASB anymore important than the ones pre ASB? Every game counts the same. Pre ASB Pujols: .316/.435/.703/1.138; 63 runs, 29 HR, 73 RBI (256 AB) Howard: .278/.341/.582/.923; 45 runs, 28 HR, 71 RBI (316 AB) If Howard had played better early on, there would have been no need for him to carry his team anywhere post ASB...they would have already been where they needed to be. Not to mention, they might not have traded Abreu and Lidle at all if they felt like they were in contention at the time...so, in a weird way, his later success actually hurt his team's chances at succeeding in the postseason. I'm not holding that against Howard, it's just an observation. Just for clarity, I'm not arguing that Howard doesn't belong in the MVP race (he does--his latest surge is making his overall rate stats finally worthy of consideration), nor am I saying that if the Phillies should happen to make the playoffs that he shouldn't win the award (he would be a really strong candidate if they make it, a decidedly lesser one if they don't). What I am saying is that with the Phillies one game over .500 and one and a half out of the WC, it's a bit early to be calling him the clear favorite since so much of the argument for him rests on the Phillies actually getting in.

Fun selective stats: Howard: 148 AB RISP (#3 NL); .250/.396/.520; 73 RBI Pujols: 103 AB RISP (T#62 NL); .388/.532/.757; 68 RBI Howard: 134 GP out of 137 team games, drove in or scored 169 (RBI+RUNS-HR...because a HR double counts) of 733 team runs for 23.2% of all his team's runs. Pujols: 117 FP out of 135 team games, drove in or scored 172 of 658 team runs for 26.2% of all his team's runs...and that's with missing more than two weeks worth of action. Howard is having a great year, but he is not more valuable to his team than Pujols is in my opinion. His gaudy RBI total is largely a byproduct of his team producing a boatload of chances for him than it is of his own success in those situations. MVP? Maybe...he has to be a candidate at least. If the Phillies snag the wildcard due to his efforts, you can make a case for it. But it's hard, for me at least, to consider him the frontrunner right now.

Which site? GatewayRedbirds? And if so, where is there game thread located? It's not GatewayRedbirds...must be CardsTalk. Go figure.

National Media finally seems to be catching on to what intelligent Cubs fans everywhere have known for quiet awhile... ------------------------ The problem for the Cubs -- who did win, by the way -- is that their three walks came in 18 innings. Which is low for the Cubs ... but not absurdly low. See, the Cubs aren't going to finish 11th, or 12th, or any other number that's at least halfway respectable. The Cubs have drawn fewer walks than any other National League team this season. Far fewer. And we shouldn't be too surprised. In 2005, the Cubs drew fewer walks than any other National League team. In 2004, the Cubs drew fewer walks than 14 National League teams. Ditto in 2003. ... This season, the Cubs have issued more walks, by a healthy margin, than any other team in the National League. In 2003, when somehow they reached the playoffs and almost the World Series, the Cubs issued more walks than any other team in the National League. Over the aforementioned four seasons, the Cubs issued 2,428 walks, more than any other team in the league. ... WalkDiff Phillies +476 Cardinals +292 Padres +262 Reds +252 Astros +204 ... After these five teams, nobody's better than 65 to the good. Nine teams have negative walk differentials, and two of them really, really stand out ... WalkDiff Pirates -425 Cubbies -625 ... The Cubs are an organization that has problems far deeper than the manager. The manager probably is a part of the problem, if only because he probably isn't a part of the eventual solution. But as long as the general manager (and his boss) are giving the manager pitchers who don't throw strikes and batters who don't take balls, it's not going to matter much who's in the dugout. Senior writer Rob Neyer writes for Insider three times most weeks during the season. You can reach him via rob.neyer@dig.com, and his new book, "Rob Neyer's Big Book of Baseball Blunders," is available everywhere. Complete story at this Link.

Explain this on to me. The Cubs were 5th in revenue and 4th in player expenses. How are they being frugal? Relatively speaking, they are more frugal than about 20 other owners (based on predictions from data in that thread) because they're underspending their predicted amount based on revenues by about 6.5 million. Boston is second in revenue and second in payroll...but they still don't crack the top ten in "owner generosity." This thread was not started, nor ever intended, to be an indictment of the Cubs ownership. I just thought it was interesting.

Well, in an informal poll of Cards fans that were friends of mine right after we picked up Weaver...almost to a person we thought that Ponson was better and we were actually downgrading. The only reasoning we could come up with was that Ponson was copping an attitude/he wasn't pulling his weight (hahaha) and management was looking to make an example of someone to light a fire under everyone else. Obviously, it hasn't worked out on any level. I'm hoping he's DFA'd tomorrow or after his next start and Mulder is reactivated.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb015.gif Didn't see that one coming.... ( :lol: )

We're fine as far as capacity with the bleacher expansion New Busch - 44,000 Miller Park - 43,000 Great American Ballpark - 42,000 Wrigley Field - 41,000 Minute Maid Park - 41,000 PNC Park - 38,000 It's not just how many, but how many in what price range. Anyway, like I said, I don't know for sure...it's just a guess as to why some of that expected revenue might be "missing."