Exile on Waveland

The Brewers are good but I certainly don't think they're the best team in the NL. I think they might be the best team in the Central; though, if so, by a small margin over the Cubs. Also, I like Fielder but at this point I don't say how you can say it's close between him and Lee. Outside of the end of last year when he admittedly came back too soon from injury, Lee has been on fire since 2005. Fielder is not yet to Lee's level. That said, position-by-position comparisons of baseball teams don't mean a whole lot. Though it is an easy way to do such a thing, I guess.

Eyre and Ohman. Oh my.

I'm not a Bulls fans, and/but that is hilarious.

Go Liverpool, Beat Milan!!! PS Please don't fall behind 3-0 again and thereby give me another heart attack.

While I'm not really too surprised -- figured the series was going seven and Utah has looked better over the past few games -- I actually picked Houston to advance to the Western Conference Finals. I was never overly impressed by the Mavericks and thought the Rockets matched up well with them. That said, I think Utah becomes very dangerous. They should handle Golden State and especially if Phoenix beats San Antonio, the Jazz have a great chance at the finals -- they've had the Suns number all year.

The crowd always overreacts during rallies. It always overreacts regardless. ding ding ding. we have a winner. there can be a pop fly to shallow center and half the crowd will stand and go insane thinking it's leaving the yard. It's quite hilarious, actually.

Haha, get out of the way!

No, they still have merit. Blanco and Barrett were catching for the same pitcher, but they were facing an entirely different collection of hitters. It's impossible to compare them. OK, I should've said "little merit" or "less merit" instead of "no" merit. My previous post discussed evidence, and how there basically can be no evidence that catching affects pitchers.

Be prepared to be attacked by the baseball geniuses on here. Do you not have a response to my post about the difference in the number of caught games having an effect on catcher ERA? Yes, and that is a dispositive argument as to why CERA is completely worthless and irrelevant -- catcher's catch different pitchers and different teams. It is, however, NOT a dispositive argument in this instance. The initial post concerned one single pitcher, in one single season (month, actually). Therefore, the usual arguments against CERA have no merit. That said, I'm not sure if there is a correlation, much less a causation. I think catcher's can affect pitcher performance, albeit not significantly. Zambrano's problems go deeper than who is behind the plate -- though that person may have some sort of affect, especially if Zambrano believes it does. Actually, the argument was that if we don't believe that the catcher has an effect on pitching performance we were kidding ourselves. There is no evidence that it does, and I was pointing out that fact. Anyone can believe what they want, and that's fine, but it's certainly not so evident that anyone is "kidding themselves" to believe that it has no impact. Regardless of the "kidding themselves" comment, the entire discussion started with Zambrano's numbers this season while throwing to Barrett and Blanco. Maybe this early into the season isn't sufficient data, but it is eyebrow raising. Second, I'm not sure what evidence could even exist. It would have to be a pitcher rotating starts an entire season between two catchers. Even then, there may be too many variables for conclusive evidence. But the catching half of "pitch and catch" surely must have some minimal affect on the other half. DLEE!!!

Be prepared to be attacked by the baseball geniuses on here. Do you not have a response to my post about the difference in the number of caught games having an effect on catcher ERA? Yes, and that is a dispositive argument as to why CERA is completely worthless and irrelevant -- catcher's catch different pitchers and different teams. It is, however, NOT a dispositive argument in this instance. The initial post concerned one single pitcher, in one single season (month, actually). Therefore, the usual arguments against CERA have no merit. That said, I'm not sure if there is a correlation, much less a causation. I think catcher's can affect pitcher performance, albeit not significantly. Zambrano's problems go deeper than who is behind the plate -- though that person may have some sort of affect, especially if Zambrano believes it does.

Well, maybe the Yankees are the archetype I discussed. I'm not counting on them missing the playoffs -- though I do think this is one of the weaker teams they've had recently -- though it sure would be great. It's one thing when a basketball or hockey teams make the playoffs every year, but when a baseball team makes it every year when there's only four spots per conference, it becomes tiresome and redundant. I thought, and still think, the Red Sox are the best team in the division and that the Yankees might be closer to the Blue Jays than the Sox, but probably not.

I think the Cubs are the archetypal better-than-record, about-to-make-a-run team. We'll see, they're still the Cubs and they've lost games in ways that make me reluctant, but I think over the long haul of 162 they'll turn in a solid season. I'm cautiously optimistic. I believe they are third in the majors in run differential. That bodes well, even this early.

We all hope it does - for evidence to the contrary, see: Cleveland Indians, 2006. Oh, it's no guarantee, but it is a good sign for Cubs fans.

To this point, the Brewers have outscored opponents by three runs (117-114), while the Cubs have outscored opponents by 21 (112-91). The Cubs are behind only the Mets, Red Sox and Blue Jays in that category. No, it hasn't shown up in the win-loss standings yet, but over the course of the season it likely will.

Dallas reminds me of a baseball team with five solid starters but no great ones -- a team built more for the regular season. Over the long haul, they're going to be right at the top, but in a shortened 7-game series you take the team with two dominate starters. (I don't mean to say Nowitzki/Howard aren't as good as other team's top two). I thought Houston would knock them out in the second round. They very well may still beat Golden State, but, even after last year, I see them more as a regular season team. (PS this has nothing to do with choking or whatnot, but everything with team construction)

Ya studying blows. I had an exam yesterday and this morning. My next one isn't until Wed so I'm not doing anything until tomorrow. Yeah, studying through the draft, Cubs baseball and NBA/NHL playoffs blows.

A belated pat on my back: I had my eyes on Anthony Gonzalez all year for the Colts. The Colts had a big need at WR. Gonzalez is a perfect fit in the slot. I'm sure they'll take heat for picking more offense (just as they did when they picked Reggie Wayne and Dallas Clark), but this was a good move.

He's got a chance to be a decent pro. Still upset he's not at Indiana.

that's what i'm assuming. more like top 15 imo. Kind of sad. that's the thing about getting great players. Better chance to win it all, but the window is much shorter due to early entry. Bill better get cracking on that 08 class. So who's going to be the favorite in the Big 12 next year? Texas is losing Durant. aTm is losing Law. Kansas is losing Wright and Rush. Looks like a down year for sure for the conference. Should still be Kansas. Though you're right, won't be a great Big 12.

I dont like the Heat either, but Im not sure why they didnt deserve to win it last year. Sure a few calls went against the Mavs in the finals, but the Mavs choked it away and the Heat took advantage of it. So as far as Im concerned, the Heat did in fact deserve to win it. The calls were absurd and the Heat didn't have that good of team. Sure, the Mavericks choked but no way Miami was the best team without the extra push from the officiating. Edit: I'm a Pacer fan and could care less about the Mavs or Heat.

Well, first of all, they will by no means keep those collective numbers up. However: 1. Hill is just really good. 2. Lilly is a solid pitcher who figured to be better in the NL, especially the first time around. 3. Marquis figured to be pretty decent this year. His modus operandi is to have a good season in his first year with a club then decline from there. Not sure if that stems from the rumored coachability problems or not. (Not that I supported the length or dollar amount he signed for) Let's hope all three continue.

Hope the Bulls win this. I don't really care one way or the other about the Bulls, though I do like some of their players, but I really don't like the Heat. They didn't deserve last year's title.

Not that the Pacers have made great deals recently, but the Bulls would either have to a) give up more or b) take on Tinsley or another bad contract along with O'Neal for the Pacers to accept that deal. That said, as a Pacer fan, I'd be very interested in some incarnation of O'Neal to the Bulls for young players/draft picks. Tyrus, Duhon, 10th pick for JO? I would absolutely do that. I think the Pacers would too. The problem with Nocioni as the centerpiece (and he was in the proposed deal) is that a) he basically plays the same position as the Pacers last two draft picks and most promising young players (Danny Granger and Shawn Williams) and b) when trading the face of a franchise which O'Neal is, you have to sell your fans on it and Nocioni isn't a sexy enough player I'm afraid. That said, I like him and would love to have him on the Pacers. I think the pacers would go for lessthan that. Just to get rid of JO as their max player. I really think Bird and Walsh would like to blow that team up and start over. I think they probably would take less than that too, mainly because I consider Tyrus Thomas a lot. I haven't looked at how salaries match up or anything, but I still think the Nocioni-Duhon-pick pot would have to be sweetened in some way.

Not that the Pacers have made great deals recently, but the Bulls would either have to a) give up more or b) take on Tinsley or another bad contract along with O'Neal for the Pacers to accept that deal. That said, as a Pacer fan, I'd be very interested in some incarnation of O'Neal to the Bulls for young players/draft picks. Tyrus, Duhon, 10th pick for JO? I would absolutely do that. I think the Pacers would too. The problem with Nocioni as the centerpiece (and he was in the proposed deal) is that a) he basically plays the same position as the Pacers last two draft picks and most promising young players (Danny Granger and Shawn Williams) and b) when trading the face of a franchise which O'Neal is, you have to sell your fans on it and Nocioni isn't a sexy enough player I'm afraid. That said, I like him and would love to have him on the Pacers.

who was the inside threat in the last bulls dynasty? That team had Michael Jordan. Jordan, and the 90's Bulls, are the exception that proves the rule. C'mon, this Bulls team is very close to contending for the NBA Championship but there isn't a Jordan on the roster.