Tracer Bullet

If Theriot sac bunts in the first inning of his own accord, Lou should slap him in the face when he gets back to the dugout. If Lou orders him to sac bunt in the first inning, Lou should be fired.

FWIW - Joe Sheehan thinks Holliday means a difference of fewer than 2 wins for the Cards down the stretch.

No. Maybe if they pick up Shea Hillenbrand. I think Pujols and any 5 NSBB posters might be better than that lineup.

Mark DeRosa was great for us, but I wouldnt call trading him dismantling the team. Other than him and Edmonds, we have the same basic core, and they're not getting the job done unless were facing really bad pitchers. Edmonds and DeRosa combined for like 140 RBI last year. Nobodys ever denied that trading DeRosa was stupid, but thats no excuse for the crap and inconsistancy weve gotten from the rest of these guys. Lots of people have denied that trading DeRosa was stupid. It was the return on the trade and/or the failing to replace him adequately that pissed people off. Planning to play Fontenot every day at 2B and not having anyone that could play 3B when (not if, when) ARam missed some time was at least unwise if not stupid. Trading a mid-30s middle infielder coming off a career year in and of itself wasn't stupid.

No you don't know what you're talking about because you've clearly demonstrated that. You've been off base on nearly everything you've said in this thread. Seriously. Within golf and amongst golf fans this will still be remembered for a long time. Had he won, it would have immediately been one of the 5 biggest stories in the modern era of golf. As it is it's still an enormous story. How casual fans see it has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Your attitude in this has been incredible. You've read things into my posts that just aren't there. A poster says that Cink will go down as the guy that ruined Watson's comeback (or something close to that). I disagreed b/c "most people won't remember who won this tournament." I never said anything about hardcore golf fans, I just made a general statement about most people. The point being Cink will not always be remember as the guy who stole this from Watson. He was basically the only guy who didn't crap away the lead on the last day. I'm not sure if you got bent out of shape primarily b/c of the Palmer comment or what. But Palmer is the more famous golfer. I'm sorry that bothers you. That's where casual fans are relevant. The fame of an athlete isn't determined by how well he is known only by hardcore fans. I never said Palmer was better, won more majors, whatever. Just that he is more famous and if his comeback had been upset by a run-of-the-mill player, it would have been a bigger story. Watson came close to winning a major in his 50s. That's a great accomplishment. Had he won, it would have been a big deal, but he didn't. Others have contended in majors (though none quite this close, that I can remember) and not won. It's just not that big of a deal. The fact that we disagree doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about. You're attitude doesn't change that.

So b/c I don't think this meltdown on the 18th will be remembered as some major event, I don't know what I'm talking about? The degree to which you're worked up over this makes be think you're related to Watson in some way.

So wrong on so many levels. I'm guessing you don't follow golf very closely. First of all, the approach on 18 was not terrible. It landed maybe 2-3 yards long, that's it. It was right at the flag and smoked. Even with the distance he hit it, it was unfortunate that it skipped all the way through. It's not like he ruined a comeback by Nicklaus or Palmer? Clearly you're not aware that Watson has won more majors than Palmer. Or that he has the 5th most majors of all-time. Or that he was #1 in the world for about 7 or 8 years immediately following Jack's reign. The enormity of an all-time great being on the doorstep at age 59 (50 freaking 9) is beyond incredible. No one has won a major in their 50's and he's 60 in a month and a half. If he wins it's immediately a top 5 story from a major in history. More impressive than Jack in '86 at Augusta which has that distinction right now. People who follow golf will certainly remember who won and they will remember Watson's run. It's not like Cink is some nobody. He's a guy that people have thought should have won more than he has, but he's been a successful player and a mainstay on the Ryder Cup teams. I do follow golf (how close is closely? I don't watch every weekend, no), but Watson doesn't have the name recognition of Palmer. Doesn't matter how many majors he's won or if he was #1 in the world whenever. Palmer is the more famous golfer. That was my only point. This will be remembered by the people who can tell you who won whatever random major, and the people that can tell you the years and the majors that Norman choked away, or some other mid-level golf stories. But most people, even those that follow golf casually, aren't going to remember this much. I don't disagree that a Watson win would have been a huge story. I disagree that a Watson loss is similarly huge. But that still doesn't make any sense. You diminished it because "it's not like Palmer or Nicklaus" but in fact he's just as accomplished as Arnold and is probably the most recognizable player of his generation. That's like saying some future story involving Kobe or LeBron isn't a big deal because "it's not like he was Jordan or Magic or Bird." And what the hell do casual fans have to do with anything? Why do they matter? You don't go to casual baseball, football, basketball fans when asking about historical perspective or importance. Casual fans think Derek Jeter is a top 5 player in baseball and Shaq going to the Cavs is a huge deal. You said it's only a big story right now because there's nothing to talk about in golf. Well that's because it's 1 of 4 majors and the biggest major in the world. When the Giants beat the Patriots in the Super Bowl to block history did you say "They're only a story right now because it's the only thing going on in football right now." you're comparing golf to the 3 biggest sports in America. They aren't the same at all. why do casual fans matter? b/c it's golf. if casual fans don't care, then the story isn't covered much by sports media and it dies quickly.

So wrong on so many levels. I'm guessing you don't follow golf very closely. First of all, the approach on 18 was not terrible. It landed maybe 2-3 yards long, that's it. It was right at the flag and smoked. Even with the distance he hit it, it was unfortunate that it skipped all the way through. It's not like he ruined a comeback by Nicklaus or Palmer? Clearly you're not aware that Watson has won more majors than Palmer. Or that he has the 5th most majors of all-time. Or that he was #1 in the world for about 7 or 8 years immediately following Jack's reign. The enormity of an all-time great being on the doorstep at age 59 (50 freaking 9) is beyond incredible. No one has won a major in their 50's and he's 60 in a month and a half. If he wins it's immediately a top 5 story from a major in history. More impressive than Jack in '86 at Augusta which has that distinction right now. People who follow golf will certainly remember who won and they will remember Watson's run. It's not like Cink is some nobody. He's a guy that people have thought should have won more than he has, but he's been a successful player and a mainstay on the Ryder Cup teams. I do follow golf (how close is closely? I don't watch every weekend, no), but Watson doesn't have the name recognition of Palmer. Doesn't matter how many majors he's won or if he was #1 in the world whenever. Palmer is the more famous golfer. That was my only point. This will be remembered by the people who can tell you who won whatever random major, and the people that can tell you the years and the majors that Norman choked away, or some other mid-level golf stories. But most people, even those that follow golf casually, aren't going to remember this much. I don't disagree that a Watson win would have been a huge story. I disagree that a Watson loss is similarly huge.

I disagree. Watson blew it. His 2nd shot was terrible, knowing he had to land it short. And it's not like that putt was close. He just got tense and choked. Tom Watson's a big story right now b/c there's nothing else to talk about in golf, but it's not like Cink is ruining a comeback by Nicklaus or Palmer. Next month, most people won't remember who won this tournament.

That's probably b/c they didn't know Fuld was available. We have enough CFs in the minors who can't hit, thank you very much. I didn't know that you were the Pirates' GM, thanks for that Jake was joking with me b/c I was clearly joking with him. There's no need for the snark.

I hope when he turns 40 he becomes a closer throwing 95 mph.

Losing Pujols vs losing Ramirez isn't close to comprable. We lost Carpenter who's VORP would probably be similar to Ramirez's. We've also lost Ludwick for significant time and Kyle Lohse for significant time. Saying we are ahead in the standings because of your injuries is disingenuous and inaccurate. Certainly not the only reason, the slumps of some of the Cubs key players are also to blame. But losing Ramirez isn't like losing Carpenter or Ludwick. It's much easier to replace a corner OF than a 3B, especially given the replacements available to each team. Besides, Bradley has played about the same number of games as Ludwick (and many of those have been PH for Bradley). Harden's made about the same # of starts as Carpenter. The difference in the standings is probably not totally explained by injuries to the Cubs, but the injury to Ramirez is a significant factor.

the variance happens because the sample's so small. most analysts agree that you'll need nearly 2-3 years of defensive data for UZR to be a good reliable indicator of defensive value. i know it's not entirely analogous, but looking at AVG right now, i have trouble believing Jason Bartlett is a .370 hitter. But does that help? We already know that AVG is a pretty bad measure of the offensive value of a player. For the record, I think Bartlett is hitting closer to .350, but your point remains. Then again, if you're saying you also don't think Bartlett is a .930 OPS player...well, I don't know what to say.

Soriano looks really uncomfortable on ice.

That's probably b/c they didn't know Fuld was available.

I'm not sure how bad a manager he was, but I liked a lot of the things he said when he was hired. Seems like the team may have been much better with Milledge and Dukes not sucking quite so bad, but if you can handle those 2 personalities, your talents would be wasted managing the Nats. Pitching still sucks though.

Lou seems to like to PH for Hill near the end of games. If we're tied or up 1, that means there's a good chance Fox has to catch Marmol. I don't want to see that.

I assume you guys all hate Michael Young with this much fury. http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/article/2009-01-11/rangers-michael-young-prefers-trade-over-switch-third-base

He was hurt for most of last year too. This year, he has had really poor command and everything has been up in the zone compared to last year. Yeah, I think that's the biggest problem. He's leaving his stuff way up in the zone and getting hit really hard.

You're welcome!

"The girlfriend of former NFL star Steve McNair first shot him in his right temple, then fired three more shots at close range, most likely as he slept, police said Wednesday." I'm pretty sure that after the first shot in the temple, he was no longer "sleeping."

My family and I passed Dunston walking the streets of St. Louis after a game. One of the biggest [expletive] ever. He was my favorite player growing up until that day. Details? These stories always make me laugh and cry at the same time. Some of my childhood heroes were/are complete jerks as people. At the end of each little league season there would be a "banquet" which was basically dinner for families. There was always an athlete that would speak. Former Cubs catcher Barry Foote was one of the speakers. During the dinner (while he was eating) a friend of mine and I approached him for his autograph. I'll admit now that it was pretty rude on our part, but he cursed us out enough to make my friend cry. I was 8 and a catcher on our team, he was my hero before that encounter. Not much of a story. I was probably 12 and we went to St Louis for a 3-game series. Stayed at the same hotel as the Cubs. Some of them were funny and cool - Jerome Walton would stand and sign forever. Had a million gold chains around his neck. Rode the elevator with Steve Stone several times and he chatted with my parents. Grace was in a bar, which I couldn't go in, but he let my parents sit next to him and chat him up. He was with a couple players I didn't know. Waited in the lobby with Mitch Williams for his pizza after a night game (he was barefoot and his shirt was completely unbuttoned). Dawson would let you walk with him but wouldn't sign. So he'd have this mob of kids following him to and from the park and he'd talk with all of us. But some were jerks. Sandberg used the utility elevator to go through the kitchen and out the back door to a limo rather than walk across the street to the park. My mom asked Luis Salazar for an autograph as he walked into the hotel and he moved his shoulders forward in a lunge-like motion, as if he was going to punch her or something. I believe she called him a jerk after that. Saw Dunston walking on the street around noon the day of a night game and he pretended he wasn't Dunston. I said something like "sure you are, you're Shawon Dunston, you're one of my favorite players." And he said something like "get lost kid." I didn't ask for an autograph or a picture, I was just excited to see the guy whose job I wanted (as a kid, I was convinced I was going to play SS for the Cubs). In retrospect, he was probably off to meet his St Louis girl or do some blow.

Exactly. Not sure why there's surprise. If ever there was a free swinger, Shawon was it. The Shawon-O-Meter didn't display his OBP. It also rarely had a 3 in the front

No, I'm looking at it the same way you are and coming to a different conclusion. Fontenot hasn't been good. He's 7/15 going into yesterday. Great. He's been terrible over the last 2 weeks and putrid over the last month. Embarrassingly so (<.500 OPS). Had he not had a little hot streak, he would have been in AAA right now. Neither Fox nor Fontenot was a great bet to get a hit against Soriano. Fox can't hit good sliders? Well neither can Fontenot. Frankly, the only way either of them was likely to get a hit was if Soriano made a mistake. But if he made a mistake to Fontenot, Mike was probably going to hit a 300' fly out into the wind. If he made a mistake to Fox, the chances of a good result were much higher.

My family and I passed Dunston walking the streets of St. Louis after a game. One of the biggest assholes ever. He was my favorite player growing up until that day.