srbin84
-
Posts
1,935 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by srbin84
-
These days, anytime a really big guy is hitting a lot of homers, I take it with a grain of salt until he takes a blood test for HGH (which will never be a part of baseball IMO). I think we should all admire and praise Soriano for his home run total this year, as he certainly doesn't have the look of a body builder. http://espn-i.starwave.com/media/apphoto/267a2026-a50c-45c2-aa1b-14183e4df1e3.jpg
-
Eyre strike
srbin84 replied to 3finger's topic in MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball
Without Karchner, the Cubs don't make the playoffs in 98. Garland has had one season as a starter that would allow him to crack a healthy Cubs rotation. It was a bad trade, but it wasn't terrible. -
Wood's velocity / Wood to be examined by doctor / ->DL
srbin84 replied to TMan92's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
Agreed. Out with the old, in with the new. (I know Wood is still young, but he looks likes he's 35 out on the mound). -
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2474658 Possibly the heir to Robinson.
-
Marmol's stuff and career reminds me of Johan Santana. I'd love to see him pitch like that as a starter.
-
Wood's velocity / Wood to be examined by doctor / ->DL
srbin84 replied to TMan92's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
I think he's fine, but he just came back too early. He probably needs/needed another 3 or 4 rehab starts. -
That sounds about right.
-
No, they are not. That is a difference. And it's more pronounce if you look at the past 2 years, which is more important when talking about guys already in their mid-to-late 30's (Grudz). From 2003-2005 Brian Giles OPS was 896, Andruw Jones was 868, a tighter difference than Walker and Grudz. But Giles outproduced him each year and out OPS+ him each year. Giles has been the better hitter. They are not essentially the same. Just because a guy is relatively close to another guy, it doesn't mean he's the same. If one guy outproduces the other guy each year, he is better. And in Walker's case, he's also younger. I think, to go back to my original point, Jones and Grudz are both as good of players as the two they are being compared to. Personally, I'll take much better defense for about .030 OPS. If you don't like range factor and zone rating, find some other defensive stats that compare any of these four players, and I'll read it.
-
Stick all you want, you'll be wrong. Grudz has been below average and Walker has been above. Walker has also been more above average than Grudz has been below average. He's also younger. There's a reason the market was thing for Grudz. He's getting paid 4 million dollars. That's pretty good for a second baseman.
-
It's not that significant of a difference other than labeling them in a general manner. Walker was slightly above average. Grudz was slighly below average. Last year's difference of 23 is significant, and it shows how much better offensively Walker was. There's nothing wrong with the stat in comparing them offensively. I just didn't see how Grudz could be classified as a below average hitter and Walker is an above average hitter. I guess it was just a gross exaggeration of the facts. No, it's not a gross exaggeration of the facts, it is the facts. Walker has been significantly better than Grudz in recent years. Well, we just disagree then. I'm sticking with OPS and a .033 difference over the last three seasons is enough for me to conclude they are pretty close to each other as hitters.
-
It's stupid because it's misleading. For example, if the league average for home runs by a first baseman is 30, and one guy has 29 and the other 31, technically one guy is a below average home run hitter and the other is an above average home run hitter. That statement may be true, but it's a waste of time to phrase things that way unless you are trying to make people think one is much better than the other when in fact they are basically the same. So because at Grudz's near best he's not as good as an average walker, you say they're essentially the same? Three year splits show an OPS difference of .033. Yeah, they're essentially the same.
-
It's stupid because it's misleading. For example, if the league average for home runs by a first baseman is 30, and one guy has 29 and the other 31, technically one guy is a below average home run hitter and the other is an above average home run hitter. That statement may be true, but it's a waste of time to phrase things that way unless you are trying to make people think one is much better than the other when in fact they are basically the same.
-
You've stopped reading the posts, haven't you?
-
It's not that significant of a difference other than labeling them in a general manner. Walker was slightly above average. Grudz was slighly below average. Last year's difference of 23 is significant, and it shows how much better offensively Walker was. There's nothing wrong with the stat in comparing them offensively. I just didn't see how Grudz could be classified as a below average hitter and Walker is an above average hitter. I guess it was just a gross exaggeration of the facts.
-
I don't understand how there could be such a difference in 2004 in OPS+ when there was only a .041 difference in OPS. The difference is only 9. 2005's difference is 23 because of the .088 difference in OPS (as well as park factors). This why is a difference of 9 the difference between below average and above average? 100 is average. Then 9 is a significant difference, and I still don't like the stat. They are closer to each other as hitters than that. Don't get too hung up on the "Below Average" "Above average" distinctions. 100 is considered the average, but both players were pretty close to each other and pretty close too 100. Both players were average that season, IMO. Goony was implying Walker was a lot better than Grudz than the stats indicate.
-
I don't understand how there could be such a difference in 2004 in OPS+ when there was only a .041 difference in OPS. The difference is only 9. 2005's difference is 23 because of the .088 difference in OPS (as well as park factors). This why is a difference of 9 the difference between below average and above average? 100 is average. Then 9 is a significant difference, and I still don't like the stat. They are closer to each other as hitters than that.
-
I don't understand how there could be such a difference in 2004 in OPS+ when there was only a .041 difference in OPS. The difference is only 9. 2005's difference is 23 because of the .088 difference in OPS (as well as park factors). This why is a difference of 9 the difference between below average and above average?
-
In before the lock.
-
I don't understand how there could be such a difference in 2004 in OPS+ when there was only a .041 difference in OPS.
-
Why? Well if the difference between the hitters' OPS is .040, and OPS+ shows that the lower hitter is below average, whereas the higher hitter is "decently above" average, it would appear that something is either incorrect, or at least skewed. I actually like OPS+, but this seems a little off to me. The difference between Walker and Grudz last season was .088 (300 OBP vs 388, for example) and it's significant enough. Walker's OPS+ was 115, Grudz was at 92. Looks right in line to me. Side note: OPS+ adjusts for both the league and the park the player plays in. OK then there was bad information given. Thanks. Edit: and I forgot Grudz is in the AL this year Yeah, there was. Grudz had a .334 OBP.
-
He blamed the lack of interest in him on collusion and said the Cubs didn't negotiate in good faith, or something like that. Couldn't understand why a below average hitter reaching his mid 30's would garner little attention. He is not below average. He has about .040 difference in OPS with Walker. He's had a sub 100 OPS+ the past couple years, which is below average. So then Walker is barely average? He's been a decent amount above average the past couple years. Then I think the OPS+ stat is garbage.
-
He blamed the lack of interest in him on collusion and said the Cubs didn't negotiate in good faith, or something like that. Couldn't understand why a below average hitter reaching his mid 30's would garner little attention. He is not below average. He has about .040 difference in OPS with Walker. He's had a sub 100 OPS+ the past couple years, which is below average. So then Walker is barely average?
-
He blamed the lack of interest in him on collusion and said the Cubs didn't negotiate in good faith, or something like that. Couldn't understand why a below average hitter reaching his mid 30's would garner little attention. He is not below average. He has about .030 difference in OPS with Walker.
-
So his range increased at 34, 35 and 36? I doubt that. It did, and Walker's has declined. Grudz http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=3199&context=fielding Walker http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=3539&context=fielding Oh, range factor. That doesn't really mean he has displayed more range. I really don't think he has. His Zone Rating has improved too.
-
So his range increased at 34, 35 and 36? I doubt that. It did, and Walker's has declined. Grudz http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=3199&context=fielding Walker http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=3539&context=fielding
