ConstableRabbit

I thought it was when they interviewed a charectar from a beer commercial (while he was still in charectar) during the World Series. ConstableRabbit don't remember dat.

I predict 5 BBs for the entire team for the entire tournament.

Hahahah red foreman? I haven't heard those. Did you also think that the voice of wrigley shoulve sounded A LOT older? haha

Since when did anyone on this site care what Fox said anyway? Wasn't any last hope of credibility killed when Buck called Derrek "Carlos" without correcting himself at the all-star game?

I don't know if this belongs in baseball discussion or social... Has anyone heard that new "I Am Wrigley Field" ad on the radio? I normally wouldn't mention it, but the Cubs don't usually have an ad campaign like the Sox or other teams do.. usually just WGN with a small ad in the paper or whatnot. It was a pretty good commercial, I acually got chills listening to it.

I'm sure Billy Beane told Macha to make that move

the price, however, is a different matter...

Screw character. If Manny hits as well as he usually does for us, he can sacrifice goats to Satan in the locker room before every game for all I care. People put far too much stock into chemistry and character. Look at those Oakland teams of the 70's that won 3 championships in a row. They would routinely get into fistfights in the locker room before and after games, but all they would do is win. You're right about the chemistry. The thing is, winning seems to settle all of those disputes losing teams have...

So if Pujols goes on the DL, and the Cards still make the playoffs, maybe then the writers will see that they didn't need him all along and Lee can come home with the MVP. :D

That's steep. I charge only $18,750 (or a fully loaded Hyundai Sonata) per total base. Gimme a call, Jim.

Very possible. Especially now that they are talking about improving the defense. Weren't they talking about that going into this season?

He was better than Lenny freaking Harris. They both sucked. Belhorn finished 2003 with a .646 OPS playing half the year in Colorado. Everyone's favorite whipping boy (Corey) is at .626 (just as bad) this year, and Neifi is at .702. Point being it wasn't Dusty's fault - Belhorn played until he became a liability and was gone. Harris was on the roster and given first chance to replace Belhorn. He failed also, hence Ramirez. Bellhorn had a roughly .680 OPS when he was benched. Harris in 2003? OPS around .480. That's not a typo. Yeah, I dont think you can even try and defend Harris. Sure, he's the career pinch hits leader, but he was sitting on the bench for all of those years for a reason.

I remember hearing somewhere that K came along because when stats were first beginning to be recorded, S stood for steal. I dont know anything about the backwards-forwards swinging-looking though. S is sacrafice. They decided that K is the second most notable letter in the word strikeout. I don't know about the backwards-forward thing either. I dont mean now, I meant like 100 years ago I think it was steal, no?

Yeah, I don't think I've ever seen Manny dive.

Yeah, I didn't want it to sound like I was saying Pujols wasn't deserving... it's not like I'm going to cry about it if he wins. However.. this Jones discussion is ridiculous.

I remember hearing somewhere that K came along because when stats were first beginning to be recorded, S stood for steal. I dont know anything about the backwards-forwards swinging-looking though.

I think this has pretty much been established, but how sad is it that this kind of debate won't be going on when the actual MVP discussion goes on... :?

Well they are now tied in win shares, so now we have a mathematical formula showing us that their respective impacts on winning games, at this point, are the same. In light of that wouldn't you have to say that because the Cardinals will be in the playoffs that, Pujols' win shares have yielded more value than Lee's? And despite what comes across has a much superior offense, which it is because of the disparity in runs scored, how can you say that Pujols has a much better supporting cast when the Cubs have a higher team OPS? I don't watch Lee play enough to know what kind of baserunner he is and what his defensive smarts are. My impression is that he is great in both those categories. I do watch enough of Pujols to know that he is an excellent baserunner, in spite of not having Lee's speed. His defensive smarts are just as good as Lee's I would say. I think Lee's superior defense comes from a superior skill set, reach, hands, etc., not from better defensive knowledge. ...because Pujols (barely) leads lee in RBI and Runs, yet the Cardinals lead the Cubs in RS 566 to 492. You know, win shares are great most of the time, but many use them as a failproof way of determining player value, when, in fact, the stat does have a large flaw which most overlook: Players who play for teams that win more games than expected, (found by using the Pythagorean expectation), will receive more win shares than players whose team wins fewer games than expected. Beacuse a team going over or falling short of its Pythagorean expectation comes to such a conclusion by chance (according to Bill James anyway), you cant give out credit based on wins. (and no, I'm not just making this up, you can read into it) Sure enough, when calculating the Pythagorean expectation for Stl, the winning % is .629, lower than their actual % of .634. They are winning more (albeit a bit more) than expected due to chance. but that's not all... The Cubs have a much greater difference from expectation to reality, and of course, they've got the short end of the stick. Pythagorean expectation for the Cubs: .491 Actual winning % for the Cubs : .474 The Cubs are losing more than expected, due to chance, and are doing so by a much larger margin than the Cardinals are winning due to chance. So... Pujols is getting more win shares than he deserves, and Lee is getting less than he deserves, due to chance, and not value. I wouldn't have mentioned it if everyone wasn't making such a big deal over winshares and how the two were tied. Winshares are usually great, but in this case, they're flawed, and in reality, Lee has the advantage. *Edited 20 sec later because I mistakenly had half of the post in italics :)

Yeah, I agree. I mean, I was just watching highlights on CSN and he looked great out there, but I couldn't help but think of Aaron Boone.

A case can be made that Lee has had better lineup protection than Pujols . Cubs' team OPS = .777 Cards' team OPS = .768 Pujols and Lee have both been good. Lee has a slighty better OPS and more home runs, while Lee has more RBI's and runs scored. Pujols has probably been the slightly better base-stealer, while Lee has been slightly better defensively (not much). Win Shares are dead even, which tells me that it could go either way. It wouldn't be a crime if either player won, but I'm guessing that Pujols will win because he's leading his team to the playoffs, while Lee isn't. Andruw Jones shouldn't even be in the conversation. The Cubs also have a better team BA I believe. But the bottom line is RUNS, and the Cubs have not scored them. The Cardinals have. Also, what is your basis for Lee being "not much" better than Pujols defensively this year? Just curious.

Lee has had significantly less opportunities for RBI than Pujols, mostly because OBP disasters Corey and Neifi (sometimes Macias) were hitting 1-2 for the majority of the first half, which makes up for his RBI defecit (I think there was a post somewhere on the boards regarding this... there was also something in the Trib). Also, I don't really buy into factoring in Runs scored as a Pujols advantage when their walks and OBP are nearly identical, and Lee has more SB... I think it's attributed to the Cardinals offense being better than the Cubs offense. Ramirez was there for a good portion of the season, but was also hurt for a good portion, and how many times did we see Lee get a leadoff single or double only to wind up stranded? Even with all of their injuries, Stl still has a better offense, and despite all this Pujols has a miniscule 5 R lead over Lee. I don't dispute that for most of the season Lee has had fewer RBI opportunities than Pujols, but so what? When Lee was blowing Pujols away in every offensive category earlier in the season the MVP decision didn't seem like a tough one, but now their stats are close enough, Lee ahead in some, Pujols in others, that each has an equally compelling statistical case in my opinion. When two players are close statistically I think the postseason fate of their teams can be taken into consideration. Without Lee the Cubs might have finished last, with him they'll finish fourth. How valuable does that make his contribution then? On the other hand, with Pujols the Cards will make the postseason with the best record in baseball, without him, well, who knows. ++ well stated The rest of Pujols' team is better than the rest of Lee's team, something which must be taken into consideration. We're not talking about "places" in the division here, we're talking about the impact a player has on a team (at least, that's what I think the MVP should be based on). There have been MVP winners on last place teams before, (A-Rod was the most recent) because they didn't just have the best stats - they were the most valuable to their team. Lee is more valuable. Without him, the Cubs would, in my opinion, be one of the worst teams in the National League. The Cardinals, without Pujols would be in 3rd place at worst because they have the pitching to carry them. You say that Pujols and Lee are so close statistically that we should use the postseason as a tiebreaker... not a new concept. But why not use defense, baserunning, baseball intelligence, etc. your tiebreaker? Look, Pujols is a stud, and I'm sure he's going to be a future hall of famer, but I cannot give him the MVP award when he's up against a guy beating him in Avg, Obp, Slg, and HR, and trailing him by 6 RBI when he's had significantly less chances. "This Guy" is also superior with the leather (Gold Glove this year), faster, and a better baserunner.... just because his team is going to the playoffs. Basically, you're agreeing with me that Lee's impact on the Cubs, in spite of having a season for the ages, amounts to the difference between the team being an also-ran and fininishing dead last. You say: "we're talking about the impact a player has on a team (at least, that's what I think the MVP should be based on)." Ultimately, what "value" did Lee add to the Cubs? The "value" of not finishing last? You concede that for the Cardinals, Pujols might be the difference between a postseason appearance (and thus a possible WS ring) and, "3rd place at worst." How does a player get anymore valuable than that? Nobody can say where the Cards would have finished without Pujols, but I don't think it is at all obvious, as many here assert, that the Cards would have made the playoffs without him. He has been the rock of this team all season. When the rest of the team was taking turns on the DL, Pujols was playing almost every game, playing with the consistency that makes him so remarkable. Rolen, Sanders, and Walker have missed a combined 46% of the team's games this season. That is huge. The talents you list like "baserunning, baseball knowledge, etc." are not really quantifiable, and if they are I don't know where to find them, so they can't be used as criteria. But if your evidence is the personal obervations of scouts and commentators I think you will find just as many in the Pujols camp as you can find in the Lee camp. IIRC when A-Rod won his MVP in 2003 for the last place Rangers, he had, by far, a better season than anyone else in the AL. I don't think the statistical difference is enough in this case to repeat that model. We are talking about "value" to one's team. I mean, I guess we're on different pages with the definition of the word. Lee is more important to his team's record than Pujols. And even without Walker, Rolen, and Sanders, the Cards have a better offense than the Cubs have had this year. It's not even close. Even less of a comparison is the pitching of the two teams. I'm willing to believe that the Cards could make a race to win the division without Pujols based on their staff. Don't believe me? Look at Houston and how their pitching has been able to carry them despite their lack of offensive production. If it was the Cardinals with a staff ERA of 4.37, you wouldnt be telling me that Pujols' value was meaningless because the team wasn't going to the playoffs, you'd be saying that without him, the team would be much, much worse off. I hope that we can all agree that the MVP award is not just about who is more important to their team's offense, it's about who is more important to one's team in general. The Cardinals have a better supporting cast and a better pitching staff than the Cubs do. Without Pujols, they wouldn't be in bad shape. Granted, the Cubs aren't in great shape, but I shudder to think where they would be without Lee. The rest of their offense, minus Ramizez (who was injured for patches of the season) is absolute garbage. Add in Lee's defense, which took several errors away from the Cubs infield (Ramirez...) and several hits away from opposing batters. Add in Lee's speed, although not blazing, which effects the mentality of the pitcher while on the mound. And while you can't quantify baserunning and baseball intelligence, as someone who (I'm assuming) watches both Cubs and Cardinals games, can you honestly tell me that Pujols is a better baserunner or smarter on defense?

Lee has had significantly less opportunities for RBI than Pujols, mostly because OBP disasters Corey and Neifi (sometimes Macias) were hitting 1-2 for the majority of the first half, which makes up for his RBI defecit (I think there was a post somewhere on the boards regarding this... there was also something in the Trib). Also, I don't really buy into factoring in Runs scored as a Pujols advantage when their walks and OBP are nearly identical, and Lee has more SB... I think it's attributed to the Cardinals offense being better than the Cubs offense. Ramirez was there for a good portion of the season, but was also hurt for a good portion, and how many times did we see Lee get a leadoff single or double only to wind up stranded? Even with all of their injuries, Stl still has a better offense, and despite all this Pujols has a miniscule 5 R lead over Lee. I don't dispute that for most of the season Lee has had fewer RBI opportunities than Pujols, but so what? When Lee was blowing Pujols away in every offensive category earlier in the season the MVP decision didn't seem like a tough one, but now their stats are close enough, Lee ahead in some, Pujols in others, that each has an equally compelling statistical case in my opinion. When two players are close statistically I think the postseason fate of their teams can be taken into consideration. Without Lee the Cubs might have finished last, with him they'll finish fourth. How valuable does that make his contribution then? On the other hand, with Pujols the Cards will make the postseason with the best record in baseball, without him, well, who knows. ++ well stated The rest of Pujols' team is better than the rest of Lee's team, something which must be taken into consideration. We're not talking about "places" in the division here, we're talking about the impact a player has on a team (at least, that's what I think the MVP should be based on). There have been MVP winners on last place teams before, (A-Rod was the most recent) because they didn't just have the best stats - they were the most valuable to their team. Lee is more valuable. Without him, the Cubs would, in my opinion, be one of the worst teams in the National League. The Cardinals, without Pujols would be in 3rd place at worst because they have the pitching to carry them. You say that Pujols and Lee are so close statistically that we should use the postseason as a tiebreaker... not a new concept. But why not use defense, baserunning, baseball intelligence, etc. your tiebreaker? Look, Pujols is a stud, and I'm sure he's going to be a future hall of famer, but I cannot give him the MVP award when he's up against a guy beating him in Avg, Obp, Slg, and HR, and trailing him by 6 RBI when he's had significantly less chances. "This Guy" is also superior with the leather (Gold Glove this year), faster, and a better baserunner.... just because his team is going to the playoffs.

Anyone who urinates on his hands has no place on my team.

Lee has had significantly less opportunities for RBI than Pujols, mostly because OBP disasters Corey and Neifi (sometimes Macias) were hitting 1-2 for the majority of the first half, which makes up for his RBI defecit (I think there was a post somewhere on the boards regarding this... there was also something in the Trib). Also, I don't really buy into factoring in Runs scored as a Pujols advantage when their walks and OBP are nearly identical, and Lee has more SB... I think it's attributed to the Cardinals offense being better than the Cubs offense. Ramirez was there for a good portion of the season, but was also hurt for a good portion, and how many times did we see Lee get a leadoff single or double only to wind up stranded? Even with all of their injuries, Stl still has a better offense, and despite all this Pujols has a miniscule 5 R lead over Lee.

How about "Livin' on a Prayer"? I heard that Welly complained about the theme song... anyone know if there's any truth to that?