PieOnMyHands

Carlos Zambrano has 30 wins over the last two years. Jeff Suppan has 32 wins over the last two years. Win-loss doesn't mean anything. Well, yes it does, but it's vastly overrated and shouldn't be considered in this situation.

Trash? Now I know a 4.57 ERA isn't all that great, but he is playing in one of the friendliest hitters parks in baseball. Home ERA: 4.90 Away ERA: 4.20 Looks like crap wherever he's pitching. My main beef with Clement is that he's making $9 million the next two years. Relative to his salary, yes -- he's trash, in my opinion. Improving your pitching staff is one thing, but grossly overpaying for a #3 starter is not the best way to go about doing that. 4.37 career ERA, too. I do feel he was very impressive with the Cubs, and that I can't explain. You could also argue he went downhill after getting in in the face (3.85 ERA before the All-Star break, 5.72 ERA after), but if you argue that then the potentially of him being permanently damaged goods always looms.

That's really been my outlook on the situation the entire time. Between and elite position player (I'm skeptical if it applies to Miggy, by the way) and an elite pitcher, you take the pitcher.

I don't know. Clement, Manny and Marte? Well, let's see: Clement is trash and is grossly overpaid, so the Orioles would be doing the Red Sox a favor by paying him $9 million over the next two years. Manny makes, what... $9 million more per year than Tejada does? I really don't see their Marte request as being as over-the-top as you personally feel it is . I view it more as Manny and Marte, and then being forced to take Clement and overpay for Clement. I would think that Manny for Tejada is pretty much an equal trade. Manny is a lot better of a player, but he's four years older and costs a lot more, so that really detracts from his value. The Sox are clearly more willing to deal than the Orioles are, so one would naturally assume that the O's would have to get the better end of the deal. Just my thoughts.

I'd say that is at least a reasonable concern, but here's why it's not comparable: the young pitchers mentioned didn't have a career ERAs of 3.24 in 2+ big league seasons when they were acquired. I think Baltimore would be stupid not to accept a Tejada-for-Prior trade.

I bet the Royals are pissed right now... I know! What a traitor! In fact, he's a double traitor: - Betrays his former team, the Cubs, for their rivals, the Cards - Betrays the Royals and the contract he signed with them for Kansas City's rival, the Cards :x

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/transactions?team=stl AWESOME. Is he any good?

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/5208404 Mets could get Manny in four-way blockbuster This is the laughable part: So while entertaining offers that involve Manny and Clement, Prior, and possibly some nice offers from the White Sox, the Orioles will settle for the Lugo and Benson package? This story has to be 100% fabricated.

I don't see Quentin being traded. What would be the point? The Byrnes deal is only for one year. No need to rush the guy. Give him another year at AAA, or just keep him on the bench and ease him into the starting role so he's ready for next year. There are also injuries and whatnot to consider. Depth is never a bad thing... and since they can just keep him in the minors, I think they'd have to be overwhelmed to give him up.

Thanks for posting this; however, (not to take anything away from you) hasn't this been the situation the whole time? If it were Prior for Tejada straight up, what would be the hold-up? I thought all along it was a game of the other GM thinking his man was more valuable: Hendry felt that he needed a pitcher in return to make the deal work, while Flanagan (is that their GM?) felt that they, too, were giving up more, and needed prospect(s) to compensate. I don't know what to think of this trade. There's so much speculation on it that I'm inclined to believe there is more going on than they're admitting, but the longer it drags on the more unlikely it is to happen... then again, the more Tejada whines, the more likely a deal will be reached... but then, since they don't have to trade him and since he will play for the Orioles next year ("I'll repsect the game," or whatever his quote was), I don't think that he's going to be any "cheaper" to get. That was a really long run-on sentence. Probably multiple ones, too.

=D> =D>

If you read the link to the quotes, it's pre-faced by a couple paragraphs: - He's in Santo Domingo; logically, one would assume that this reporter has at least some experience with the Spanish language. - He claims to have personally interviewed Miguel Tejada himself. So to answer your question: yes, there is a chance that this is all fabricated by the media. I doubt it, though. There's nothing in this most recent interview to suggest that Tejada has other views than what have already been expressed. Furthermore, if you look at this quote... That all-but-ensures that he had previously discussed this issue with the media personally, not through a representative. I don't want to sit here and argue semantics with you, because it's stupid. If you don't believe in these stories, don't post in here. You don't have to insult me and make it sound like I'm a gullable fan starving for news just because I react to an article..

Tejada is ridiculous. He's starting to sound like Manny! "I want to be traded." "I didn't say I wanted to be traded, I am just frustrated." "I want to be traded."

True, but regardless... that's still saying something about what kind of upgrade we're going to expect. And you can argue that Rolen might not revert back to career form... but he's almost certain to be better than last year, when he would wince in pain when he would swing and miss.

I'll take my chances with Scott Rolen over Abraham Nunez. AVG OBP SLG OPS .235 .323 .383 .706 (roughly 200 injured Scott Rolen at-bats) .285 .343 .361 .704 (421 Abraham Nunez at-bats) An injured Scott Rolen that experiences pain every time he swings a bat is (slightly) more productive than Abraham Nunez.

You need to add the word "in" after "appears" and before "Michael." And Lewis' should be Lewis's. I would change "yr." to year." Edit calibre to caliber. I think you can get away with either, though... Doesn't sound right. Change it to something like, "Slugging percentage [] appears to be the best baseball statistic to non-Sabermatricians." I don't think you need a comma after just the word Slugging Percentage... it didn't sound correct to me. I think you should provide an example in this. "Decent" is arbitrary and might be confusing... Change the James' to James's. The form you're using is if there is more than one James. (Like a family of 'em.) Um, I'd re-word this to something like: "Average is denoted by the following forumla:" What you have doesn't need the colon, I don't think. Not sure who your audience is, but they might not know what the DH is? Before this, I would at least mention what "plain old" OPS is. I didn't see you do that.. I'd change that to something like "arguably their two best starting pitchers," simply 'cause that's up for interpretation. Also; mentioned how they let other big-name free agents walk, and draw in draft picks as a result of it. Typo. "a young" = a young. I think one should be "one's." Uhm you said you were going to re-work the conclusion, and no offense, but I would too. I would try and use the word "revolutionize." Maybe something like: "Sabermetrics have become an increasingly popular form of evaluation of baseball; with the release of the book "Moneyball," a greater understanding of the game has been revealed to the general public. Sabermetrics are quickly replacing counting stats are the premiere way to analyze a player, as they are believed to be much more reliable. Many will agree that the implementation of Sabermetrics into baseball have had a revolutionary effect in numerous areas surrounding the game." It was a good paper. I'd maybe give a definition of Sabermetrics, and maybe talk about the SABR group (http://www.sabr.org/). Hope this helps! Edit: My Microsoft Office trial ran out, so I had to view it in Wordpad; so sorry I couldn't provide page numbers and whatnot...

I don't know. They're both filthy. Before I had Extra Innings last year, I watched a lot of Cubs games. I'd say that if I had to pick, I'd take Zambrano. He's a headcase, but you really can't hold that against him with the way he pitches. I also agree that Prior being injury-prone is a misconception. If you get hit with a line drive like Prior did, you get hurt, regardless of who you are. That's not injury-prone, that's unfortunate.

But it also says that Ponson will get $1 million to suck, and Milton will get $7 million to suck. Yep, hoping for a miracle. That's how baseball works. Try your hand in a table of roulette and hope that you picked the right number. That's just silly to say that they're going to make a signing hoping their crossed fingers come through for them. Maybe that's why Cubs fans are so surprised every year at the moves Jocketty makes? While luck may be involved, it's hardly the defining factor in the ultimate outcome of these signings. First of all, Byrnes would only be valuable in a platoon. A .704 OPS versus righties the last three years. It's pointless to compare him to the other guys, because he wouldn't be competing against them... he would be sharing time with them. And how are you so sure they'll be keeping all of those outfielders? Rumors earlier in the season suggested that Gonzalez is possibly being shopped. And Walt and Co. feel that he is no longer fat, no longer lazy, no longer a drunk and no longer dumb. It's as simple as that. Jason Johnson: 2004: 5.13 ERA 2005: 4.54 ERA Brett Tomko: 2004: 4.04 ERA 2005: 4.48 ERA Scott Elarton: 2004: 5.90 ERA 2005: 4.61 ERA I'm not shading the numbers. They've sucked recently, and they've sucked throughout their careers. Those are below-average pitchers getting $4 million (+) a year. They also have no precedent of being good (sans limited duty). Has Ponson had sucess in multiple seasons? Yes, he has. Tomko has not. Johnson has not. Elarton has not. Are there apparent reasons for Ponson slipping so much the last couple of years? Yes, problems with weight and alcohol, that he has since (seemingly) corrected. Any glaring issues for Johnson? As far as I know, no. Tomko? Ditto. Elarton? Same. Then if I missed your point, you missed his: $1 million for a guy with a lot of upside is not a dumb risk to take. That's what he's arguing. If you say he's not, then you're just arguing semantics.

No, because MLB free agency is not a giant slot machine. That's not the way it works. It's not about "odds" or "luck," it's about doing your research and taking risks you feel have a potential pay-off. If I put my money in a slot machine, there is a designated set of chances I have to win. It's not the same for baseball. By your analogy, Junior Spivey and Ricky Henderson both have equal potential to have success in the league. A slot machine does not take past history into consideration. It does not take somebody's life into consideration. It does not take a person's phsyical tools into consideration. Have you noticed something else about these signings? They're almost always one-year deals. If you sign a cheap contract, you want to play harder than you ever have before so that you can cash in. His highest OPS in a single season is .723. What "upside" does he have? He strikes out far more often than he walks, he never has had a remotely decent season, he's 33 and isn't entering his prime, or anything... You could make a case for him being a platoon player, because he hit lefties better last year, but based on his 3-year splits -- .653 OPS vs. lefties, .616 OPS vs. righties -- last year seemed more like an anomaly than anything else. Well... that's true. However, you have to factor in a number of things: - Does Byrnes want to start? He got a contract from Arizona, $1 year, $2.2 million, I think. But did they tell him he'd be starting? I can assure you, if he came here, he would play only in a platoon... - Do we have room? After Encarnacion (you could argue we shoulda got Encarnacion instead of Byrnes...), we have how many outfielders, now? Taguchi, Edmonds, J-Rod, Bigbie, Encarnacion... I really can't see us adding another outfielder. La Russa has been notorious, in recent years, for playing utility infielders in the outfield, so if needed, someone like Luna would play out there. The outfield is full, now. See, I really get frustrated when you argue this point. Hypothetical situation: Sidney Ponson, Walt Jocketty and Tony La Russa have a meeting, about Ponson potentially becoming a Card. You make it sound like Ponson drove there drunk, and then crashed his car into the restaurant they were meeting in; Ponson then required a friend to push him in on a wheelchair, due to his morbid obesity leaving him all-but-immobile. Ponson, penny-less at the time, passes on dinner and instead eats an entire box of Krispy Kreme doughnuts which were expired and were obtained from a random dumpster down the street from the cardbox box he lives in. If Ponson is such a slob, why would they have signed him? Clearly, he convinced them that he has turned his life around. And yeah, you're probably going to counter-argue that he's just throwing up a smokescreen to get another contract... and maybe that's possible? But is Jocketty dumb enough to fall for that, if it were the case? If a fat Sidney Ponson who's battling alcohol problems can post a better ERA than Eric Milton last year, what does that say? This situation isn't unprecedented, either: http://stlcardinals.scout.com/2/481241.html The following was a quote from the Post-Dispatch: And bear in mind this is coming from a Post-Dispatch article entitled, "Signing Ponson seems desperate." Again, take the quotes for what they're worth. Obviously Jocketty isn't going to say, "Yeah, it's a really risky signing. We're only signing him based on upside, there's a good chance he's just going to suck." But it bothers me that you seem to portray St. Louis management as uneducated and oblivious to his past problems... Oh, and again... signings are all relative to the market! Scott Elarton is going to make $4 million a year through 2007. His career ERA is 5.10. His best season's ERA is 3.48, which came in limited duty in 1999. His next-best season since then was in 2004, when he had a 4.53 ERA. Jason Johnson also will make $4 million this year. His career ERA is 4.88. His best season's ERA was 4.09, in 2001. Brett Tomko is making $4+ million over the next two years. Career ERA of 4.52. His best season's ERA was eight years ago, when he posted an ERA of 3.43 in 126 IP. Since then, his lowest ERA was 4.04. How much will Scott Elarton make if he sucks? $4 million. How much will Jason Johnson make if he sucks? $4 million. How much will Brett Tomko make if he sucks? $4+ million. How does Ponson compare to these? He's -much- cheaper, any way you spin it. $1 million if he sucks. If Ponson reaches his potential and pitches like he did in 2002 and 2003, he'll make $2.5 million. I don't mind Ponson for a reason: there's a precedent for him being very good (a 3.75 ERA is very good, compared to the 4.29 league average ERA). If the Sidney Ponson signing was as horrible as you make it sound, then how do you classify the Jason Johnson signing? The Scott Elarton one? How 'bout Brett Tomko's contract? Ah, very good point. I'm not just agreeing with you 'cause we're the same person, either. [Edit: the last statement was expected to be taken with a bucket of salt.] I think you saw a mistake in the Encarnacion signing.... we gave him three years based on one previously good season. You know how that reminds me of? Mr. AJ Burnett. Fortunately, this is three years... not five. But still, it's the same premise. His OPS was nearly 100 points higher in 2005 than it was in 04; his 2003 was right on par with his career average. His .756 career OPS is not worth $5 million a year..

I had a gift card to a book store and bought "3 Nights in August." Has anyone here read that? What'd you think of it?

I really prefer NSBB to Cards Talk. Forums are much more stable, and they're actually moderated. Very nice. I think I"m mistaken for a troll, though, which I'm not. I do disagree with people a lot -- even on Cards Talk. But, as a stat-head, there's always a reason for what I post... (usually...bias gets the best of everyone once in a while :wink: )

Encarnacion was probably worse, 'cause at least Jones can platoon when they find out how bad he is. Encarnacion will just be bad and we'll be forced to play. Regardless of what his career year was, he has still had above-average seasons in regards to the average second baseman. Oh, and, Spivey at $1.5 million or Castillo at $5+ million? Yeah, Spivey (when healthy) is better. Face it: Castillo is overrated. He has speed, defense, and can swipe a base... no, his OPS doesn't do that justice. He's not the player people make him out to be, though. I'm not. I'd guess that K-Town was a Cardinal troll or something. If you think I'm trolling, you're sorely mistaken. I've used logic and statistics to back up all of my arguments. If you choose to disagree that's one thing, but to call me a troll because you disagree is just asinine. Flat out asinine.

I don't think it was him being exhausted, so much as him losing focus. He noted that he lost focus after we clinched the division. I was very paranoid and figured he was just convering him really ending the season poorly... but then the postseason came, and he had a 2.14 ERA in 21 IP. I'll respectfull disagree and argue this: you're undervaluing the addition of Rolen. We're going from Nunez to Rolen. While Nunez had a career year, his OPS was only .704! Rolen's career OPS is something like .890. Even if he doesn't do what he did in 2004, he's undeniably a significant upgrade over Nunez.

I openly admit that Juan Encarnacion sucks, and we just signed him. I'll tell you that Scott Rolen will never do what he did in 2004. Chris Carpenter won't even have a season like 2005 again. If you only take one, injury-filled year into consideration... then yes, he does suck. But I'm not going to let a career of above-average play go unconsidered because on one bad year. If he didn't suck last year, he wouldn't be in St. Louis. In case you haven't noticed, we buy low in hopes of a big return. I don't know how hard that is to understand. It sometimes is hard to justify a signing, but that's the way this "system" works. Well the most of Corey Patterson I saw was when he played St. Louis, and put up an OPS of .871. But seriously, he's got everything. Power, speed... he can play defense. Corey Patterson has the tools to succeed. However, it's pretty evident that he's overstayed his welcome in Chicago, and it would be best for both him and the team to find him a new home; the Cubs and Patterson isn't going to work out. There's a chance he could go elsewhere and become successful, but it's all about potential... which he has a lot of. Maybe he's like a less extreme version of Ankiel? I don't know. (Basically I'm suggesting that Patterson may convert into a pitcher. I'm joking!) A change of scenery often does a player good... I think the same applies to Corey.

What's his username on these boards?