baseball7897

True, but a team dosent have a chance to go to the playoffs every year. This is probably the Twins year to win the world series. I think their pitching is solid(specially in the bullpen). Their lineup produces enough runs to win a game every day. Twins are my favorites to win the World Series if they make it to the playoffs.

I dont want him. He cannot stay healthy for a 162 game season. A lot of guys help a team without playing 162 games. Drew has a bad injury history. But he's also produced when he's played, and has played the bulk of most seasons. I think you can get a good 130 games out of him, giving him regular rest. The .380+ OBP and 850+ OPS over 130 games, with a legit shot for 900-1000 OPS, would probably be more valuable to a team than something like Jacque Jones and his expected 145-150 games of .320 or less OBP and 815 or less OPS. If you move Jacque to center, play JD in right and Murton in left, you have a pretty good OF. Mix in a guy like Jose Cruz Jr. to give Drew a breather and take some of Murton's at bats if he slumps. Or maybe go after Jason Michaels for that role. Have Pie waiting in the wings if you're forced to move Jacque over to RF. Keep Pagan as the 5th OF who can also help you rest some guys. It's not ideal of course, but it could work out well, especially if you can find some 2B production. Absolutely. I think a outfield of Murton, Drew, and Jones would be something Hendry should consider. Then adding a guy like Jay Payton who can play all 3 outfield spots would be something Hendry should look at also. I would like Hendry to take a look at Macier Izturis. His versatility would be a huge asset for the cubs.

I dont want him. He cannot stay healthy for a 162 game season. He's on pace for 147 games this year. He played in 145 games two years ago for Atlanta. You certainly can't blame him for missing time last year after someone broke his hand with a fastball. That would be like holding Lee responsible for getting his wrist broken in a collision with Furcal. Drew did miss a lot of time early in his career with nagging injuries. But if he can stay healthly enough to play 145 games, he's worth a look. IF he can stay healthy for 145 like you said, then I would also take a look at him. He would be a risk though. But the saying in the business world is "the more risk you take, the higher the reward".

I dont want him. He cannot stay healthy for a 162 game season.

The only place on the field he can stay healthy is 1b. Cubs have D-Lee already. He cannot play the outfield in my opinion either. With his history of leg injuries that would just be a disaster. Nomar burned the cubs twice with his injuries in 04 and 05. Stay away from him.

Man, I hope your right because I miss the Prior of old. He basically has been out all year with this injury...I just hope it heals properly in the offseason. I just have a feeling that sugery is just around the corner. I'm no doctor, but I find it strange that a sore shoulder would keep you out for a year. Yeah, me too. I just can't for the life of me figure out how a pitcher like that would end up needing surgery along those lines. We all know he was overworked in 2003, but he's shown he still had it outside of those random onfield injuries since then. Why now? What happened between the end of last year and spring training that wrecked him? I think him being sick in the offseason and possibly bad off-season workout habits all contribute to this. When was the last time we heard news about him? Kinda strange eh? Prior will tell you he is a hard worker. I am going to take his word for that. I think he has had mostly bad luck. Freak injuries like 03 and 05 havent helped him either. IF he can stay healthy, he is one of the better pitchers in the league in my opinion.

This is why I favor a team having a good defense. Cubs should be winning this game. Not only did those errors hurt the Cubs chances of winning this game, but it forced them to go to the bullpen earlier than they should of.

Ideally... Zambrano Zito Lackey(im sure the cubs could make a signficant offer to the Angels) Miller/Prior Hill

I got lost somewhere along the way here. Anyway, the Cubs do have enough money to get a couple of good starting pitchers this offseason. What they must do is cut bait on expensive, but unproductive players, elsewhere, and stay away from wasting a million here and there on roster filler, when $350,000 guys can do the same job. Whether or not Hill pitches the third game of the season is irrelevent to me. I just feel like a lot of people are going overboard in what they think he's likely to do next season, along the lines of those who thought Murton was a shoe-in 850 OPS guy and Cedeno was going to be great. You have to build contigencies into your team, and plan for setbacks. You can't build teams with too high of expectations for individual players, otherwise you are setting your team up for failure, in terms of meeting your expectations. A perfect example of this is Zach Duke. He was 8-2 with a 1.81 ERA last year. He was counted on to be their number 3 starter this year, and so far he's 9-13 with a 4.68 ERA. There's a lesson to be learned here. Hill should be counted on nothing more but a 5th starter. People always talk about how hitter's need to make adjustments, well pitchers need to make adustments also. You brought up a good example in Zach Duke.

so much for that

Yeah, it's still early in the game, but he looks really good tonight. His motion is so effortless. I hope he gets the........ tonight.

Was your book written by a children's author? My book was written with baseball knowledge. I dont like how stat geeks think they know what they are talking about. All they go by is stats, they dont see the things that happen that dont get recorded in a baseball stat book. For example: a runner at 2b with no outs, the hitter hits the ball to the to the right side of the infield. That is considered a great AB by a person who knowledges the game more than a stat geek. Stat geeks would classify that AB has a worthless AB. To be fair to the man, his more inflamatory comments may have been caused by a wicked potshot I delivered. I would like to apologize for that comment. I simply became rather aggrivated after making a few well thought out and articulated arguments, and saw you coming back with nothing but more rhetoric and anecdotal evidence. For what it's worth, I do see where all of your arguments come from. I had been indoctrinated with the same things throughout all my years of playing ball (a career cut tragically short by varsity football blowing my knee out on three separate occassions, causing me to miss baseball season rehabbing even though I was penciled in every season as the #3 or 4 hitter in the lineup, playing first or third base on a team that had a bunch of people go on to play college ball) I don't see the use of statistics as a substitute for good old baseball knowledge. It's simply another avenue of perception. Akin to the political world... watching only Fox News or only CNN isn't going to show you the truth. It's only going to cloud your vision with propoganda. The truth is in there somewhere... a happy medium. I dont want you to think im single minded, lol. I use stats to judge players, but I dont use stats to judge everything about the game of baseball.

I never said I had the advantage of playing the game. I do believe I have enough knowledge to understand the game. Although im not really good sometimes in explaning things, I do feel I know what I am talking about. My opinion obviously differs from the majority of the people on here though. I dont want anyone thinking Im better than anyone, because im not. Dick Mill's program really gave me alot of knowledge about the game. When you use your experience as a player and then refer to others as "stats geeks" and comment that we should "watch the game" you are doing just that. Would you be offended if I called you a dumb jock? That's the flip side of your stats geek, watch the game comment. I never said anything about how you, or anyone else should watch the game. Someone made a comment to me that suggested I should watch the game.

I never said I had the advantage because I play the game. I do believe I have enough knowledge to understand the game. Although im not really good sometimes in explaning things, I do feel I know what I am talking about. My opinion obviously differs from the majority of the people on here though. I dont want anyone thinking Im better than anyone, because im not. Im sure there is more people on this site more knowledgeable with baseball than I am. I just dont want you to think im a cocky sob. I apologize if I pissed anyone off.

Oscar Acosta

Graduated High School in June, Now playing baseball at Kishwaukee Community College. 6'3 160lb skinny guy. Scouting report" "quick arm, lots of potential, just needs to put on some weight." Throw Fastball 83-86 right now, my coach who is a scout for the D-Backs, said if I work at getting stronger I could easily be throwing 90+ next year. I could possibly be drafted in 08.

Cabrera and his .966 Fielding % (hey, if you can use it I can.) versus Nomar and his .957? That's a margin of less than one error. And you've already established that the scorekeepers can be vindictive (which is half the reason Nomar was traded). For all intents and purposes, Cabrera didn't do any better than Nomar that year... and they were both below the league average fielding percentage. I thought judging someone on their defensive% was a horrible way to judge a player? :D It's not. But with your baseball experience, I'm sure you realize it's somewhat more applicable for shortstops than catchers. The SS position is the most demanding positions on the field. I was just joking with the guy anyways. I like to judge a player by his defensive %, but some dont. Then what is your justification for saying that Cabrera was that much better than Nomar that Boston wouldn't have won the title with him at SS. I dont have the stats In front of me, but I remember reading something about Cabrera committing very few errors(4 I believe)when he was traded to the Red Sox. Mientkiewicz also contributed to helping out the infield defense.

Cabrera and his .966 Fielding % (hey, if you can use it I can.) versus Nomar and his .957? That's a margin of less than one error. And you've already established that the scorekeepers can be vindictive (which is half the reason Nomar was traded). For all intents and purposes, Cabrera didn't do any better than Nomar that year... and they were both below the league average fielding percentage. I thought judging someone on their defensive% was a horrible way to judge a player? :D It's not. But with your baseball experience, I'm sure you realize it's somewhat more applicable for shortstops than catchers. The SS position is the most demanding positions on the field. I was just joking with the guy anyways. I like to judge a player by his defensive %, but some dont. I also use Range factor to judge a players defensive ability.

Cabrera and his .966 Fielding % (hey, if you can use it I can.) versus Nomar and his .957? That's a margin of less than one error. And you've already established that the scorekeepers can be vindictive (which is half the reason Nomar was traded). For all intents and purposes, Cabrera didn't do any better than Nomar that year... and they were both below the league average fielding percentage. I thought judging someone on their defensive% was a horrible way to judge a player? :D

And I haven't? :roll: If that were the case you wouldn't embarass yourself with the following items: Only in certain (and rare) situations is sacrificing an out for advancing the runner going to contribute positively to win expectancy. Almost all of the cases are late in the game with a run differential of one or zero, no outs, and runners already in scoring position. Well it certainly isn't good. But does having one crappy defensive player exclude teams from postseason glory? Absolutely not. The Red Sox made it as far as they did in 04 due to Manny and Ortiz, not despite them. Only if you can make it to the postseason. There's such a turnover in pitching in-season due to injuries league-wide, that it's near impossible to keep a pitching staff intact and healthy for an entire 162 game schedule. The rate of pitching injuries trumps that of injuries for position players. A good offensive squad with pitching that fluctuates from average when healthy to bad when injuries strike is much more likely to make it to the postseason than a team with bad offense, but pitching that fluctuates from good when healthy to average when bad. It's simple. Just look at the permutations. Team A can have the following situations occur: Good Offense - Average Pitching Good Offense - Bad Pitching Team B can have these: Bad Offense - Good Pitching Bad Offense - Average Pitching With the offense being better, the team has the stability necessary to make it to the postseason more often. Just look to the pitching rich and injury riddled Cubs if you wish to make the situation hit closer to home. That's the one smart thing you've said so far. I never made a statement that you didnt play baseball. Relax :) I believe the only reason the Red Sox won the World Series was because they improved their defense. They added Cabrera and Mientkiewicz. If they kept nomar that year, they wouldnt of won the world series I believe.

That is because he packed on a couple of pounds since then. Bengie had a 3.55 CERA last year. 3rd best in all of baseball. Barrett had a 4.45 CERA last year. Isn't a 32yo. C that has been gaining too much weight for his own good a red flag? He isn't quick behind the plate and has been terrible at throwing out runners. He has thrown out 17.5% of the runners. Molina has a 4.55 CERA this year. Barrett is at 4.57. Although, I really don't like that stat. One thing that coaches would tell that they dont like about Molina is the number of pass balls he allows. Im not sure what his numbers are this year in that category, but last year he allowed 10 with the Angels. That can be contributed to the number of pitchers like K-Rod who throw alot of balls in the dirt. Whoa! Hold the train! Passed Balls are only committed when the ball doesn't hit the dirt before it gets to the catcher. Otherwise it's a Wild Pitch. Watch the games and you might know that. Its called wildness. Something K-Rod shows now and then. You might expect him to throw a pitch in the dirt, but before you know its at the hitters head, and bengie is being charged for a pass ball. Ervin Santana last year threw a pitch in the dirt that was really an uncatchable pitch, but Bengie was charged for a pass ball. I think the score keepers in Anaheim had something agianst Bengie. Probably because they expect him to make the plays all the time. Which I fell in that category also last year.

I'd bet good money I've watched more baseball games than you. I caught every single Cubs game that was on WGN, CSN, ESPN, or Fox in 04 and 05, and whatever games I could find on MLBTV. Granted, I've slipped back to slightly in excess of a hundred games so far this year... but I don't doubt that beats you handily irregardless. Do you know what the difference between a .275 and a .300 hitter is? It's one hit every other week. There's a decent difference in the value of these two players, and I'd bet dollars to dimes you couldn't pick the one hitting better more than 50% of the time if you simply watched all the games and never looked at the statistics. The human brain just isn't set to function like you imply it is. You remember the big things, the important moments. You don't remember the guy hitting .300 getting the single in the top of the 4th with nobody on and two out. You remember the guy hitting .275 getting the single with the bases loaded in the 9th, two outs, and down by one. The fact of the matter is that 162 games is far too long for your mind to develop an accurate mental account of it all... especially what you saw back in the second week of May. Statistics aren't a substitute for the game. They're simply the only way to get an accurate portrait of what has happened...the stuff that your mind no longer can be counted on for. Now if you can't grasp the meaning of certain statistics... if you're scared of all the complex math that goes into them... don't use them. But certainly don't automatically assume that people that are fully capable of using them have only seen baseball inside a laboratory setting. I watch baseball. I know it damn well. But just because you don't know what we're talking about, suddenly I'm a stats geek who never watches the games? Puhleaze. Oh, and interestingly enough... That hypothetical situation you alluded to earlier? It's often measured using Run Expectancy or Win Expectancy... both of which I look at in determining the value of a player. Just because Darin Erstad does those things doesn't make him a viable option at first base, though. Even after those adjustments, he's one of the worst first basemen in the league. That was probaby one of the most ignorant statements I have heard in a number of years. Yeah, I dont watch baseball games. :roll: I play baseball games. I know what it takes to win a game. I know moving a runner over is very important for the team to succeed. I know poor defense kills a baseball team. Having a liability in the field is horrible for a team. I know if you have a good defense supported with a solid pitching staff your chances are better than a team filled with Offensive minded players who cant play a lick of defense. Theres so much more that I know that I dont even bother to post.

That is because he packed on a couple of pounds since then. Bengie had a 3.55 CERA last year. 3rd best in all of baseball. Barrett had a 4.45 CERA last year. Isn't a 32yo. C that has been gaining too much weight for his own good a red flag? He isn't quick behind the plate and has been terrible at throwing out runners. He has thrown out 17.5% of the runners. Molina has a 4.55 CERA this year. Barrett is at 4.57. Although, I really don't like that stat. One thing that coaches would tell that they dont like about Molina is the number of pass balls he allows. Im not sure what his numbers are this year in that category, but last year he allowed 10 with the Angels. That can be contributed to the number of pitchers like K-Rod who throw alot of balls in the dirt.

No they are not. Let me guess, you're going to be using VORP and that other garbage to judge Molina? Stats dont tell you everything. Playing and watching are 2 different things. I hate it when people just use some meaningless stats like VORP to judge a player. Average, Hr, RBI's, OBP, and fielding% are a good way to judge a player in my book. Was your book written by a children's author? My book was written with baseball knowledge. I dont like how stat geeks think they know what they are talking about. All they go by is stats, they dont see the things that happen that dont get recorded in a baseball stat book. For example: a runner at 2b with no outs, the hitter hits the ball to the to the right side of the infield. That is considered a great AB by a person who knowledges the game more than a stat geek. Stat geeks would classify that AB has a worthless AB. I'm proud to be a stat geek. And from a stat perspective I'd look at that at bat and compare the expected runs from the first situation to the second situation to evaluate the success of the AB. From recollection, it's close to a wash. Going with that assumption... If a "knowledgeable baseball person" (is there a copyright fro that phrase) thinks it was a great AB, s/he's kidding her/himself. The number of expected runs in the inning has not been significantly altered. A HR in that situation is a great AB. So is a triple or a double. An RBI single is a very good AB. A walk is a good AB that increases the number of expected runs in the inning and drive up the pitch count. Those are all better than the groundout to advance the runner. So I don't see why on earth the GO would be considered a "Great" at bat unless all of the above are considered "even greater" AB's. Now, If a "stat geek" thinks it was a worthless AB, that's either accurate or not depending on whether you care to look at the denotation or connotation of "Worthless". In that the run expectation is not significantly altered, the at bat is, nearly by definition, without worth. But the common definition of worthless connotes something with significant negative worth, which is clearly not the case. How is that response from a self-professed "geek"? Its called a productive out. I dont think stat geeks like productive outs that much. Yeah, a walk, a hit, a HR,a Double, or a Triple would be great in a situation like that. But, if the hitter makes a out to the right side of the infield he should get high five's from his teammates in the dugout. Thats baseball knowledge. I know some people on this site would take that AB has worthless.

That is because he packed on a couple of pounds since then. Bengie had a 3.55 CERA last year. 3rd best in all of baseball. Barrett had a 4.45 CERA last year.