Sammy Sofa

Giants had Lincecum and maybe Cain and they won it last year. Nobody really on the cusp. Who did the Padres have last year? Heath Bell, and nobody on the cusp. I don't think it's a requirement to have multiple guys in the top 100. Yeah, that's what I was leaning towards. Having 3 top 100 guys is pretty damn good, and having more than that is pretty damn great.

How many good teams typically have more than 3-5 top 100 guys? I'm really asking. Having 3 up there and then a bunch on the cusp seems about right if you're not the Yankees or Red Sox (or sometimes the Phillies).

If Tyler Colvin becomes a "top 100 talent" I will violently murder one poster at random here. Just kidding. It wouldn't be random.

No, he needs to take more.

Take more 3's.

What a little turd.

Oh, you're so pretty. You realize nobody is saying that he's definitely going to be Young, right? There's a big world between that and saying, "DeWitt is still young and still cheap and could very well be productive, either on his own or in a platoon, or at least productive enough until a better candidate comes along (ie-someone not nearly as expensive and an as old as Michael Young)." The Cubs don't have to rush out and force a change at 2B right now if the right option isn't there, and Michael Young is not the right option. A DeWitt/Baker platoon certainly won't be spectacular, but it almost certainly would at least be serviceable.

I had somehow never noticed that Young is 35. Do not want.

Given your repeated complaints about people not knowing what this book is about, I have absolutely no clue how you're coming to this conclusion. The info we have so far has made it very clear that the authors' intentions are to be the "anti-Moneyball." They think the Moneyball approach is a flawed and "doomed" one (and are somehow showing this with the Red Sox, of all teams). If their goal is what you've stated, then they're still writing a stupid book because Moneyball is hardly the source to base such an argument around. Contrary to what certain people think, MB is not some kind of sabermetric bible. In short, there's absolutely no way the book is as measured and sensible as you're stating, that's abundantly clear from the authors' own information. These guys cleary THINK that MB is year one for sabermetrics and are trying to tear it down because of it. If someone doesn't like MB, whatever, but to state that it presents some kind of absolute predictive system is complete garbage and betrays just how little these guys understand what they're trying to counter. And the fans you described are not a "broad swath" of anything. Fans that casually drop something like BABIP are still very much in the minority of baseball fans, and this book is not addressing them. It's trying to take down what the authors see as much bigger and more sacred cows.

Maybe he's literally a really, really big guy. Somehow. Who knows how WSR works.

Name a single good sabermetrics book you've read. Point out anyone here who says that sabermetrics are infallible. Any good sabermetric book worth the paper it's printed on points out the limitations and variables of evaluating players; they're not claimed to be perfect predictive systems in the first place, hence why the key goals of this book, as stated by the authors, are so glaringly wrong and misguided. They don't seem to understand either Moneyball or sabermetrics. What in the information released so far has you convinced that they do? Why are so ready to believe that they are going to provide insight into the limitations of sabermetrics (which, again, the good sabermetric books and sites have already done) based on the faulty approach they're taking in the first place?

Anything "anti-sabermetric" is trash. That's a moronic position to take. Realizing sabermetrics aren't perfect is just common sense. Being "anti-sabermetric" is stupidly tilting at windmills.

It's a safe bet this book will be the last place you'll be able to find such conclusions.

It's cool; Deng is a sexy monster.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaat the funk is with these 3's rattling out.

BAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLIN'.

Lot of them have coaching obligations. True, though I was surprised that BJ wasn't there. He's still an agent, right? He's Rose's agent. Heh. Oh [expletive], that's right.

Lot of them have coaching obligations. True, though I was surprised that BJ wasn't there. He's still an agent, right?

I wish these guys were my dad. (Love you, dad.)

HAVE MERCY.

Holllllllllllllyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy [expletive].

The Jazz should be thanking the basketball gods that they willed 4 deadeye Bull's 3's to rattle in and out. YESSSSSSSSSSSSSS.

This is god-like.

This is a nifty start.

I thought Noah didn't score at all in the last game.