CubDad4Ever

Hyperbole, i never ever, ever ,ever exagerate. just ask my wife. Hey we all have our sins appear loud and clear when passionately disscussing issues. I have no problem with mine. As i said i cant afford to take it personally in my job. But to deny that a large segment of this board beats the same dead horses on some arguments is a huge fib. I have no problem with those that question the cubs moves or their management , only those that dogmatically hang onto the same metric as an all proving point. Win Shares went far beyond OBP. As mr miles addressed , their are different situational applications for even such a telling stat as OBP. That being said , I love and appreciate the work you do mr Tim and those like you. The board is a good thing. Gods Peace Coach L.

Bruce Miles , excellent angle on the interpretation of a metric like obp. Thats the fresh approach , i love to read. I had not thought of those exact applications , but they make sense. God Bless Coach L.

Again if you dont belong to the club , dont sweat it. It is a given that things like win shares go across the metric spectrum. But two things are true . James always realuates in every book he has written. knowing , none of these are ablsoutes. Im just calling out absolutes, there are not many. By the way , im very sabermetrically friendly. Thats why i read alot. However coachs have to take info and apply it across the board. Sterotypeing , some of you do it all the time and try to hide behind perception of a dusty, hendry , hughes response. These guys butts are already on the line, they get hired to be fired in the pros. So thats why they make fun of absolute staments by "some" stat oriented people. Middle ground is more than numbers Arrogance was spouted by baseball guys for a lot of years. I think the same arrogence is being returned by some stat people. Neither is going to get the job done. As always the truth lies somewhere in between. God Bless Coach L

If you dont belong in that group it wasnt meant for you . I too have read palmer and others and moneyball also . They all have some value when taken in context. I wish more people would . But regardless i enjoy reading peoples takes and as a coach i dont take it personally. God Bless and Go Cubs

I really get it now. Most of the sarcasm on this board is based on percieved views from the book moneyball and "old school baseballs respones to it. Walks clog , get guys who can catch it etc. First of all i have a lot of friends that are ex college and some pro players. They respect how dificullt the game is and how much failure is in it. They naturally question statements in the form of absolutes and are often trying to exhibit said feelings , with sarcasm and humor. Many on this board buy it hook line and sinker as they do moneyball in general . They fail to read all the books Bill James has written . (i have) and his abhorance of people who run away with one stat or metric. He values constant evaulation and multiple metric tests. So guys like Gary Hughes have their value when taken in context , as does Dusty. The truth is people dont want to blame people like Wood and Prior who have not pitched to the level of expectation. Its easier to make Dusty the whipping boy with Nefi. Offense is critical but many aspects of the game are also. Evaluation needs to be eclectic and diverse to fit diverse needs. God Bless Coach L

I will say again it apparently makes more sense to many fine organizations in baseball , to pay a nefi like ss money (a gone, everett, cabrera) Like i said , im in your dish on michaels , because you only value on base, even in an underpowered,non centerfielder type with 250 pa to go to prove he has value beyond 4th outfielder status. If he can only play corner of , he has even further to go. People are rightly valuing defense more and more in the post steriod era , it affects pitching greatly, unless your whiffing every guy. That being said Michaels would be a great 4th of . and like Nefi a great insurance policy , who will not kill you starting . The difference is Nefi plays a more critical position. I dont want nefi in the hall . I dont want him batting leadoff , I would prefer him not starting at 2nd. But if he has to start at ss . He wont be the reason we dont make it to the series. God Bless Coach L

As is the assumption , he can produce the same numbers full time, a large difference by the numbers or by anyones logic who has competed in competitive athletics. God Bless Coach L

As i am , for people who cant get there are many ways to evaulate and then subevaluate based on situation. God Bless Coach L

Guess Theo buys defense wins too. Alex Gonzales , worse than Nefi on offense will be the Bo Sox shortstop. God Bless Coach L

No your missing the argument , more than obp for a player who has not show great power , defense or been put in the line up everyday to prove he can hold a smaller sample size , is not valued for good reasons by many orgnizations to the same level you would. Case in point for valuing metrics. Theo (sabermetric friendly man) Bill James , BoSox are about to sign a ss who is worse offensively than Nefi Alex Gonzales, all they write about and rave about is his defense . James in more thank one book( i have read ALL his books) talks about valuing defense and more than one stat To really understand a player. I used this because again if its Michaels available as a backup and platoon guy (and we could get him) fine. But the slappy - dusty- nefi talkers are making themselves one deminsional critics. God Bless Coach L.

Well put San Jose. a way undervalued metric is the abilty to play long periods over a career or consistantly over a season is huge. I was leary of Drew for just that reason and he had a much larger and better sample size than Michaels. It has to be taken into consideration along with michaels age, meaning he would be bucking a large historcal trend as far as breaking out at his age. As far as steals not being important , please, the single most important turning point in the 2004 run for the BOSOX was roberts steal off lights out in game 4 of the series against the Yanks. Situations along with having to account for the threat of them both influence good teams. The 75per cent rule has to be taken with that grain of salt. God Bless you Like myself passionate fans of the Northsiders.

Because he is in his prime , plays every day and has an aggregate of .355 much more of a certaintity than michaels. God Bless Coach L.

I think you have to be careful about falling in love with guys like michaels who have yet to prove at 30 they can produce numbers and d over the whole season. He also has a low slug and little speed. He is not the player Jaun P is . You can pencil Juan in for .350 for a whole season and impactive results on the bases. I am curious about 2nd base more than any positon besides Improved starting pitching. God Bless Coach L.

ridiculous , statement on michaels. Massive simplification. There is a reason he has been a part time player. James would laugh at your argument as i would. Assuming a full time number from a massive part time metric on top of the fact he is 30. Your right everyone else has forgot that best kept secret Pierre is not the great leadoff man on all levels . that everyone in baseball says he is . It is michaels and he has been kept out of a full time job until he is 30 because everyone in baseball cant get it. Small sample size , historical age disadvantage. You would be lucking out your rear to get full time numbers on those metrics. But that would defeat your part time obp, nefi stinks, dustys dump and slappy Jaun simplifications. O and forgot when you assume that much , you make a you know what out of you and me. Gods Peace Coach L. Sorry for the semi aggressive posture. Its not personal , i just dont by those redundent arguments

read all my thread arguments, no one is saying offense is not important, you are walking past the fact that you cannot igonore defenses affect on pitching. Undervaluing those metrics as others is as deadly as ignoring obp, You have to find a way to balance it within the context of the defensive spectrum (bill James) ss-c-cf. Thats why its not as simple as some folks try to make it. The cubs looked into two great ss for a reason. That position requires great D not Mike Young D and finding O their is a bonus if you can get it. God Bless Coach L

First , in no way is Lofton equal to Pierre, His age and durability are huge question Marks. A very undervalued metric is the ability to bring it for a whole season. My reason for knowing Nomar would not be andbodys choice for ss.(proven to be true) is lack of both defense and durability. You cant have to many what ifs in your lineup. As much as i love Cedeno and Murton , they still qualify as what ifs. So you cant pile more on top. Huff is not worth more than Jones , when prospects vrs money are taken into consideration , not to mention a large difference in D. Mabry for short bursts will be an upgrade for Aramis as his backup . Im not saying its perfect , but i see how we got were we are. God Bless Coach L

Several excellent points have been brought up in this thread. I said earlier Nefi is nothing more than a representaion of several thought process's. The cubs largest two problems have been 1. Lack of exellent starting pitching , all the hoopla after 2003 turned into getting out pitched by the cardinals and astros staffs for two years. 2. Low walk totals. The cubs averages and slugging have been pretty good. 1 carries more weight than two in baseball history. Pitching and Defense will trump good hitting , so if you are not able to get a Frucal or Tejada , Jeter. You must insure you have a durable option at ss that is not weak on D. Bowa had one of the weakest seaons on offense ever in 84 the cubs were not handicapped a bit. I dont think they were a Yankee like Juggernaut on O that year either. I believe Hendry and Baker understand more than you think about trying to improve obp. They have to do it in the context of servicing defense and pitching , because it does win. They also had to change over an old lineup from 84. With few legit minor league positional players to use as trade bait or for themselves. God Bless Coach L

Marty Marion was a poor offensive option , whose defense cornerstoned some excellent cardinal team. You refuse to do what Bill James and others do account for defense and other metrics. The Yankees were a offensive jugguarnaut that could not win it all. Pitching and defense any day of the week . Make the big name starts Prior and Wood accountable . No its easier if disengenuous to blame Nefi and Dusty. I too know and want better rounded starters at shortstop will help the offense. My point is and will be evaluate in broader terms and see us a team that can use many parts . We are not Oakland in terms of Payroll. I am glad Nefi is a back up for us. I dont want him as a starter expect in injury , but think his value lies in his defense and durability if needed. Nomar stunk last year when durability and defense are called into the metric pool .God Bless Coach L

Several points. understand one point does not equate another. Asking for a more complete evaluation of players (which was my goal) including nefi, does not equate tolerance of losing or poor management. In reality it supports good management. Any knowlegable person will tell you that one metric does not a player make, even though some (obp) carry strong offensive corralations. The argument i made is based on the premise of me loving the cubs , reading books and websites that are very sabermetically alligned and being a 23 hs and small college football and track coach. The big mistake being made by people who stay narrow in their stat thinking as cited by james is as simple minded as those they make fun of for not using metrics such as on base. I belive a balanced approach is best (stat analysis, scouting , psych profiling and intuition) because human beings still play the game and even though baseball can be evaluated on cummulitve data, it still cannot be predicted perfectly. Situations do affect people differently. I have two friends that played over 10 years in the big leagues , that consintanly reinforce those points with me. That being said my biggest complaint is the fact the cubs , draft has not produced an every day player since 1991 (glanville) and he was not great shakes. That puts the ball in the scouting and develoupments hands . It is critical that stat is improved. Whether the answer is something like drafting college middle infielders (defensive athletes) whose larger sample size metrics predict on base success or better profiling of some sort kicks out that streak The cubs will then be on their way. God Bless Coach L

Let me clarify sucks , sucks is hitting like mendoza and fielding like manny rameriz only at ss. I think they rewarded nefi 2.5 per because he can in fact start a whole year (rarer than you think and definitly an under valued metric ) and field like a gold glover at a top defensive position. You are paying for protection Right or wrong thats how they see it. Also we are not nor should we operate like the oakland beanes, We should operate like the red sox , who have a larger payroll and still try to evaluate a variety of ways. In the book mind games it talked about defensive values leading to the trade of Normar. Again i understand Nefis weakness and hope we get better OPS from a player with low salary control like Cedeno . I know every good value decsion helps , but i dont think his money handicaps the team a bit. God Bless Coach L.

This thread has triggered the type of debate i enjoy, analysis not just beating a horse with no facts behind it (mixed metaphor) Yes i like nefi as a starter if he has to replace an injured player. I dont value his offense at the top of the order. and again compare him to other great defenders at that position have had bad ops. I know its not his strength and in this non steriod era , people are going to value defensive metrics in a different light than in the easy walk smash ball era. (read juicing the game). I hope ronny is a 340 guy obp . but based on his minor splits i have my doubts that he will eclipse nefi . He seems to be a average driven guy. Like nefi , everett and cabrera. God Bless you all Coach L.

Again you dont get it. I am not arguing the value of OBP or flippin the lack of it on the cubs. Chester the chimp can figure that one out. It is valuing more than just that in a player. Nefi is better than almost any backup shortstop in baseball because he brings gold glove level defense(rob neyer) and can play every day. People who are brittle , or stink on defense can not be put at short or just like having poor on base , you wont win with it , unless your dominant on o and pitching in which case you could get by with a poor obp shortstop anyway. You cant argue about Dustys using a proven commidity at that position after an injury , you can complain about his spot in the batting order. I want more also . But he is an excellent back up shortstop. Value him for what he is. God Bless Coach L

No one is arguing offensive metrics my friend. However He had to play, We had a hurt defensive has been at short . There is a reason one of the best offensive shortstops in the past 20 years got sent packing from Boston. Nefi is weak offensively but not the reason the cubs did not win. Again i would love to have a ss who brings it on both ends. Hopefully Cedeno can be that man. Starting Pitching health and production can and needs to lead the way. I am well aware our offensive def. is walking more. God Bless Coach L.

This thread is near and dear to my heart , because of what it represents. The generalizing of 1 facet of the game (obp) throught a narrow interpretation of the book moneyball (by the way mike lewis wrote it ,not bill james) I have read almost everything bill james has written and he would fundementally disagree with alot said on this board . He stopped writing abstracts because he feared what i see on this board alot . Taking one stat and running with it to the exculsion of total evaluation of a player in the context of his situation. It is convienent and easy to blame dusty and nefi , hiding behind on base percents shield. In reality many winning teams had weak hitting defensive shortstops . Today we look at the astros and angels and white sox , all who employed low obp shortsops. James always points out how critical and undervalued defense is at this positon . Giving huge props to Mazeroski and others like him who have been defensive stalwarts while not very strong on the offensive end. Now that being said I understand the following. Moneyball was a heroic epic for people who love to analyze the game thorough stats. I am a football coach who has always looked to find hidden value on offense and in players. Stats help . But you have to look at more than one thing to gain value. Speed does have value , defense has tremendous value, being a good clubhouse guy , baserunner, intelligent player all have value. Nefi got put in a crappy spot in the order on a flawed team. Dusty Baker is not a chump , he talks huge mess to keep people off his players . He is not perfect but definilty a solid manger. In a perfect world , you have A Rod at short or Jeter. But the people that wanted Normar out there are thinking with a very narrow view. There is a reason he wat not wanted by anybody in baseall to play short . He is a defensive liabilty and he is brittle. The same rational scares me about Todd Walker. Sorry for the long winded pontification. but i think we all can use the collective brains on this board to analyze more completly and fairly. It will make for better reading and less constant whining about the same subjects. God Bless you all and i hope the cubs have a great year. Coach L.

Lees improvment was much greater in percentage of x base hits as apposed to singles. Even with regression to the mean i think we are looking at a 1000 ops guy for several years. No way to i want a part of Drew ( injuries are a part of statistical evaluation also) or Bradley. ridiculous wanna be moneyball trades must include the fact that some folks cant show up all the time either through injuries or attitude. Lee is a huge benifet to the offense and defense , plus a great fit in chicago and Wrigley. Yes you make a trade that can benifit your team . However just adding a couple of Potential OPS up on people with flaws does not equate success . The cubs should attempt to be more like the Red Sox and Yankees not the A's . The Red Sox figured this out under Epstein. They are big market teams who should use their advantage in capital to keep strong offensive players and valued pitchers. While using analytical tools to pick up value players from a variety of venues. God Bless and get Frucal.